Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: calcutta police act 1866 Sorted by: old Court: armed forces tribunal aft regional bench chennai Year: 2011 Page 1 of about 7 results (0.028 seconds)

Jun 06 2011 (TRI)

ic 28598 Lt Col N.Ganganna Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary an ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

Decided on : Jun-06-2011

..... reasonable doubt to sustain the conviction and punishment of dismissal awarded by the general court martial? 26. the point:-the first charge is under section 52(b) of the army act, which reads as follows:- ??at shahdol, between 10th december 1991 and 23rd december 1991, while being officer commanding, 7 madhya pradesh (independent) company, national cadet corps, shahdol, dishonestly ..... railway warrant the journey from shahdol to pipariya and back, well knowing the said information to be false ? . 3(c) charge no.4 against the applicant is under army act section 63 ?? an act prejudicial to good order and military discipline, i.e., ??at shahdol, on 14th march 1992, when officer commanding 7 madhya pradesh (independent) company, national cadet corps, shahdol ..... , national cadet corps, shahdol, dishonestly misappropriated a sum of rs.6,975/-, the property belonging to the government ? . 3(a) charge no.2 against the applicant is under army act section 52(f), that is to say ??at shahdol, on 2nd november 1991, while being officer commanding, 7 madhya pradesh (independent) company, national cadet corps, with intent to defraud, ..... court of inquiry were not examined before the general court martial. 3. before the general court martial four charges were framed against the accused. charge no.1 is under army act section 52(b) ?? dishonestly misappropriating the property belonging to the government ?? that is to say ??at shahdol, between 10th december 1991 and 23rd december 1991, while being officer .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 2011 (TRI)

ic-43708n Lt Col Prithiviraj Patnaik Vs. Government of India, Through ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

Decided on : Jan-04-2011

..... such adverse remarks, the government of karnataka, considering his merit and ability and outstanding qualities, has already promoted the appellant as the inspector general of police. although, the remarks made by the reporting officer have been questioned by the appellant as if they had been made by respondent 2, the court ..... anxious consideration to the uncontroverted material placed before us we have reached the conclusion that the case of the appellant for promotion to the indian police service cadre has not been considered by the committee in a just and fair way and his case has been disposed of contrary to the ..... ??17. the principle is well-settled that in accordance with the rules of natural justice, an adverse report in a confidential roll cannot be acted upon to deny promotional opportunities unless it is communicated to the person concerned, so that he has an opportunity to improve his work and conduct or ..... or even constructive res judicata. after the constitution of this armed forces tribunal by virtue of the section 14(5) of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007, this tribunal is considered to sit in the arm chair of the selection board and decide the issues raised in the application before ..... capt ks judge informed the applicant through his letter dated 02.08.1999 about the foul play and mal intention of col sk chakravorty to act against the medical ethics. the commanding officer was also annoyed and had a bias against the applicant for the reason that he had raised specific .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 21 2011 (TRI)

No.648696-l Jwo Chandrashekhar Vs. Union of India, Rep. by Its Secreta ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

Decided on : Feb-21-2011

..... applicant only on the basis of the policy dated 24.11.2005. it is pertinent to note at this juncture that as per section 26(5) of the air force act, the applicant is having a remedy by way of revision against the impugned order/impugned letter before the central government which admittedly the applicant has not exhausted so far. in ..... new policy dated 24.11.2005 [air hq/c 40651/pa(cpc)] is in vogue. it is made clear that as per section 14(1) of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 this tribunal is not empowered to alter, change or modify the said new policy dated 24.11.2005. point is answered accordingly. 7. in fine, this application is dismissed ..... . but, the applicant is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum after exhausting the statutory remedy available to him under section 26(5) of the air force act, 1950. time three months from today. no costs.

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 2011 (TRI)

Masoom Ali (S.No.619009-g) Vs. Union of India Rep by Its Secretary and ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

Decided on : Feb-25-2011

..... common counter would raise a preliminary objection to say that the petitioner had not strictly exhausted the departmental remedies available to him in terms of section 26 of air force act 1950 and para 621 of the regulations for the air force (revised edition) 1964 before approaching the honble high court. the respondents, while confirming the details of service of the ..... july, 2003 to july, 2006 as unjust. on transfer to the chennai regional bench of the armed forces tribunal, in accordance with section 34 (2) of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007, the same has been re-numbered as ta no.153/2010. 2. the short facts of the petition to the affidavit sans irrelevant particulars are set out as follows ..... for leave to appeal. but, we consider the case as not a fit one to be granted leave to appeal as per section 31 (1) of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007, since there is no point of law of general public importance involved in this petition. (iv) no costs. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 2011 (TRI)

Poongol Vs. Union of India Represented by Chief of the Army Staff and ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

Decided on : Apr-06-2011

..... army stating that her son was missing from 12th march 1987. after the receipt of the telegram, the applicant had deputed her elder son to calcutta on 07.06.1987 in order to know about the whereabouts of her younger son raman. only at late evening, the elder son of ..... training to no.5 technical training regiment from 19th june 1986 to 23rd january 1987. thereafter, he was posted to eastern command signal regiment at calcutta. there was no information received from the applicants son thereafter. the husband of the applicant viz. mr.n.muthusamy became mental after receiving the ..... therein the date of disappearance of the serving armed forces personnel/pensioners is reckoned from the date the first information report is lodged with the police by the family and the period of one year after which the benefits of family pension and gratuity are be sanctioned, is reckoned from this ..... families of those personnel who suddenly disappear both in operational and non-operational areas. the family members of missing personnel have to lodge a police report regarding the missing status of the individual and submit a copy of the same to the concerned records office which would further process the ..... m.raman could not be apprehended without getting a report from the concerned police as to the effect that the individual could not be apprehended. so, the respondents cannot take shelter under section 106(2) of the army act and to contend that since the individual could not be apprehended, the respondents .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 2011 (TRI)

A. Chandra Babu Naidu Vs. the General Officer Commanding-in-chief

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

Decided on : Aug-12-2011

..... by the competent authority, then he would have applied for leave declining to accept any further duty like sentry duty. under section 64(c) of army act, if a personnel attempts to commit suicide due to mental illness or stress and strain, he will not be relieved off from the punishment. the defence ..... committing the offence of attempting to commit suicide. but, in our considered view, the reason for committing an offence under section 64(c) of the army act ie., attempting to commit suicide is not a point to be considered to set aside the impugned order. the only valuable ground of defence the accused ..... would focus the attention of this tribunal contending that the punishment awarded to the applicant/appellant for an offence under section 64(c) of the army act is disproportionate and without considering the mental status of the accused, the extreme penalty has been awarded to the applicant/appellant and the same is liable ..... nation as a defence personnel, the applicant/appellant ought not to have stooped to such a level to commit an extreme act of attempting to commit suicide, which is a disgraceful and cowardice act under our consideration. so, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the summary court martial, ..... the tribunal made by justice aca adityan) 1. the applicant/appellant, who had faced a charge under section 64(c) of the army act and received a punishment of dismissal at the hands of the summary court martial vide order no.22013/p/621/dv-4, dated 28th october .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 2011 (TRI)

Lt Col (Ts) Sasanka Shekhar SwaIn Vs. Union of India, Through the Secr ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

Decided on : Nov-30-2011

..... first charge levelled against the accused has been proved. 30(a) the first charge against the accused/appellant is under section 63 of the army act ?? an act prejudicial to good order and military discipline ?? ie., improperly obtained siq for 72 hours on 04.09.1999. the evidence of p.w.3 ..... refused to return to the court room, thereby causing interruption in the proceedings of the said court martial. (viii) the eighth charge is, under army act section 39(a), absenting himself without leave in that he, at field, absented himself without leave from 22nd november 1999 to 7th december 1999. 3 ..... without permission of the presiding officer, thereby causing interruption in the proceedings of the said court martial. (vii) the seventh charge is, under army act section 59(e), contempt of court martial by causing an interruption in the proceedings of such court in that he, at secundrabad, on 28th october ..... the sixth charge is, under army act section 59(e), contempt of court martial by causing an interruption in the proceedings of such court in that he, at secundrabad, on 25th october 1999 ..... leave in that he, at field, absented himself without leave from 13th august 1999 to 26th august 1999. (v) the fifth charge is, under army act section 39(a), absenting himself without leave in that he, at secunderabad, absented himself without leave from 12th october 1999 to 14th october 1999. (vi) .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //