Summary
A pending intra-court appeal from a High Court single judge’s decision in an armed forces matter cannot be transferred to the Armed Forces Tribunal. The Tribunal does not replace the High Court’s constitutional writ jurisdiction. On the service dispute itself, the appeal failed because the appellant had failed the aptitude test and had been considered but found ineligible for alternative posts.
Issues
- Whether Section 34 requires transfer of a pending intra-court appeal to the Armed Forces Tribunal.
- Whether the Tribunal excludes High Court writ review.
- Whether alternative employment had been considered before discharge.
Provisions considered
- Section 14(1), Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007The Tribunal’s service jurisdiction expressly excludes the constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts under Articles 226 and 227. (¶¶ 3, 10, 15)
- Section 34, Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007Transfer of pending proceedings does not extend to an intra-court appeal against a High Court single judge’s judgment. (¶¶ 5, 10, 17)
Held
- A Tribunal cannot hear an appeal from a sitting High Court judge. Statutory transfer provisions do not require transfer of a pending appeal from a single judge to the High Court’s Division Bench. (¶¶ 15, 16, 17)
- High Court judicial review survives. An efficacious alternative remedy ordinarily warrants restraint, but that principle concerns discretion rather than absence of jurisdiction and does not impose a blanket bar on writ petitions against Tribunal orders. The question of Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction over the AFT was not decided. (¶¶ 10, 11, 13, 14)
- The discharge order need not itself recite consideration of alternative appointment. The record showed consideration for two categories, for both of which the appellant failed the height requirement; the applicable policy had been followed. (¶¶ 18, 19)
Result
Appeal dismissed on merits and pending applications disposed of. The Court rejected the contention that the pending intra-court appeal required transfer to the Armed Forces Tribunal and upheld discharge on the service record.