Sqn Ldr Anju Gahlot Vs Union of India & Ors
.... he applicant that once she has been sanctioned maternity leave and she is on maternity leave upto 11.03.2022, the respondents cannot prematurely release her on medical grounds with effect from 23.12.2021. 3. Finding some force in the aforesaid contention, we had requested Shri Anil Gautam, ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
Ex Hay Clk (SD) Uma Kant Sahoo Vs Union of India & Ors
.... MA 2993/2021 The name of the applicant shown in the order passed on 1601 August, 2021 be corrected from Uma Kant Sahoo to Umakanta Sahoo. MA stands disposed of. ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
Priyanka Datta W/o Lt Col Pushpinder Singh Vs Union of India & Ors
.... h may arise in case the ex-parte decree is set aside. That being so, the ex-parte decree has not been set aside and the direction to the Family Court is to decide the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 afresh in accordance with law, however, the ex-parte order ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
Union of India and Ors Vs Ex Nk Sub Sunil Kumar KP
.... espondents in the conduct of the Court Martial. We find that he is deliberately disobeying the directions issued by us and a case for cancellation of his bail is made out, as canvassed before us by Dr. Mahndiyan. However, before taking any action in the matter, in the interest of justice, we giv ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
Nk Amiya Bhadra (Retd) Vs Union of India & Ors
.... ing with the directions issued and implementing the benefits that accrued to the applicant by virtue of the PPO. The bailable warrant be issued for production of the Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, CPPC, Samriddhi Bhawan, 1 Strand Road, Kolkata, West Bengal-700 001 by the Registry in ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
JWO Paul Peter (Retd.) Vs Union of India & Ors
.... Others (O.A. No. 62 of 2014 decided on 13.02.2015). The applicant is aggrieved by the revision in pension from 01.01.2006 instead of 01.07.2003 which is the date of his discharge. Counsel for the respondents concedes that the applicant is entitled for revision in his pension from the date ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
Maj Navdeep Banyal Vs Union of India & Ors
.... fications like MD, MS etc 35 yrs." 10. It is the case of the respondents that the applicant was eligible for any of the three DPC Boards conducted between the years 2012 and 2013. The DPC Board for the year 2012 was conducted twice, first one in June 2012 and the second one ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
Ex Sgt Vedera Laxma Reddy Vs Union of India & Ors
.... e, 1999, 9 th February, 2001 and 17 th December, 2008 have been considered. Most significantly, the recommendations of the Gth CPC, accepted by Government of India through its letter dated llth November, 2008 and the circular dated 2" February, 2009, have also been ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
Ex Nk Chander Dutt Vashisht Vs Union of India & Ors
.... Rules, 1954, read with Section 3(vi) of the Army Act, 1950. Further the same pensionary provisions as applicable to the three defence services are applicable to the DSC and all such personnel taken together are referred as "Armed Fortes Personnel" as becomes clear from the opening ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
Maj Ishan Dixit Vs Union of India & Ors
.... developments that have taken place; the respondents have decided to permit the applicant to appear in the examination in question. 2. Accordingly, we dispose of this application with a direction to the respondents to permit the applicant to appear in the fo ...
Armed Forces Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi
Get In Touch With Us
We are here to help. Want to learn more about our services? Please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you!