Vikram vs Union Of India And Others

OA 194/2020

This application has been filed under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 challenging a show cause notice (Annexure A-1) dated 20th

December, 2019 issued to the applicant. It is the case of the applicant that without considering the fact that the applicant is suffering from alcohol

dependency syndrome, a physical disorder, not a case where discharge could be undertaken by resorting to provisions of Rule 15(2)(g) (ii) of the Air

Force Rules, 1969, the action taken by the respondents is unsustainable in law. It is stated that the entire action is contrary to the statutory provisions

and in violation of principles of natural justice, undertaken in a mechanical way without application of mind.

Respondents have raised objections to the maintainability of the application primarily on the ground that it is only a show cause notice and the applicant

has yet to file his reply to the same and the respondents would thereafter give a call and pass an appropriate order, thereafter the applicant has a

statutory remedy and therefore the application at this stage only when a show cause has been issued is unsustainable. Learned counsel for the

applicant vehemently opposed the aforesaid submission and tried to indicate that prima facie he has made out a case where even at this stage

interference can be made and his prayer for interim relief requires consideration.

We find that at this stage when only a show cause notice has been issued and the applicant has not even filed reply to the same, no indulgence in the

matter is called for. It is for the respondent to give a call on the representation or defence of the applicant as may be taken in reply to the show cause

notice and after a final order is passed the applicant has a remedy under the statute. Merely because applicant is claiming an interim relief ignoring the

procedure contemplated under law, we see no reason to interfere in the matter particularly when balance of convenience and irreparable loss, which

primarily, are necessary for grant of interim relief, are not existing in this case. Accordingly, we see no reason for any indulgence in the matter. The

Original Application is dismissed with the liberty to the applicant to initiate proceedings in accordance with law after a final decision is taken by the

respondents.