High CourtsDivision Bench(2024) 12 DEL CK 1905

MWO Prasanna Kumar Mohapatra (Retd) vs Union Of India & Ors.

Delhi High Court · Decided on 6 December 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Navin Chawla, J · Shalinder Kaur, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
W.P.(C) 16918/2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 397 words

NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)

CM APPL. 71682/2024 (exemption)

1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 16918/2024

3.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Order dated 02.09.2024 passed by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal [AFT], Principal Bench, New Delhi in Original Application (O.A) No. 2624/2022 titled MWO Prasanna Kr Mohapatra (Retd) vs. Union of India & Ors., dismissing the said O.A by which the petitioner had challenged the Discharge Order dated 17.10.2022 denying extension of service period of the petitioner upon the expiry of the period of his engagement.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned AFT has failed to appreciate the reasons for which the petitioner could not apply for the extension of his service on time. She submits that the wife of the petitioner was unwell, and whereafter, Covid-19 pandemic hit the country, because of which the petitioner could not have his Annual Medical Examination (AME) conducted. It was also because of non-availability of a Specialist Doctor for conducting the AME.

5.

She further submits that the learned AFT has failed to appreciate that on the one hand, the petitioner is being granted promotion, while on the other, Show Cause Notices have been issued to the petitioner.

6.

She submits that even the Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) for the period 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 were submitted belatedly.

7.

We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, however, find no merit in the same. As rightly observed by the learned AFT in its Impugned Order, grant of an extension of service is not a matter of right; it is subject to the discretion of the Air Headquarter or the Competent Authority.

8.

The reasons cited by the petitioner for not submitting his willingness to continue his service within the prescribed period, do not inspire any confidence. The petitioner was repeatedly reminded and warned that he must have his AME conducted. In spite of the same, he failed to do so. Covid-19 pandemic had occurred only in 2020, whereas, the petitioner’s AME has been pending since the year 2019. The illness of his wife also cannot be a ground to seek any exemption from the AME, which is a must for personnel of the Armed Forces.

9.

We, therefore, find no merit in the present petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed.