HC refers service matters of armed forces to AFT

Saturday, September 22, 2012, Chandigarh, India
Saurabh Malik/TNS Chandigarh, September 21, 2012
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, by passing a single order, has referred “all service matters concerning members of the armed forces” to the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT). The “matters” involve pension and other retirement benefits pending before the HC.
The significance of the order can be gauged from the fact that the HC has disposed of, through the order, nothing less than 31 writ petitions filed by Army personnel “pertaining to the disability pension, dismissal from service, etc.”
The bunch comprised writ petitions against the orders passed by the CAT and Regular Second Appeals against the judgments and decrees of the courts below.
Taking up the petitions by Naik Prem Singh and other petitioners against the Union of India and other respondents, a Division Bench of the HC asserted the petitions pertaining to the disability pension, dismissal from service, etc. of Army personnel fell within the definition of “service matters” as defined in Section 3(O) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007.
The bench added: “At the outset, counsel for the respondents have raised a preliminary objection by placing reliance on Section 34 read with Section 14 and 3(O) of the Act. A conjoint reading of these Sections would show that all service matters concerning the members of Armed Forces, involving pension and other retiral benefits, pending before this court are required to be transferred to the AFT, Chandigarh Bench, which is constituted for this jurisdiction”.
HC refers service matters of armed forces to AFT

Feudal Culture Promoting Suicides: Army chief plays it down

Jawan ends life, Army chief plays it down
TNN Aug 17, 2012, 03.09AM IST
NEW DELHI: Even as another soldier took his life on Thursday, Army chief General Bikram Singh said the recent cases of suicide and stand-offs between officers and jawans were "isolated incidents'' in the 1.13-million strong force.
Asked about the ugly face-off between officers and jawans of an armoured corps unit at Samba in J&K after a soldier committed suicide on August 8, Gen Singh said, "We have instituted two separate courts of inquiry. There was no connection between the suicide and the incident.''
"Let me tell you that the situation is not that bad... these are isolated incidents. As far as the atmosphere in battalions is concerned, we are looking into them and trying to correct them. We have been trying to address these issues,'' he said. "I have been addressing the troops and officers, and I will be going to Siachen (and eastern Ladakh) tomorrow and there also, I will do the same thing.''
The remarks came even as another soldier, Bhup Singh of the 72nd Armoured Regiment, committed suicide at his unit residential quarter in Hisar. "He hanged himself from the ceiling fan after his wife left to drop their two children to school at about 7.30 am,'' said an officer.
As many as 1,018 soldiers have committed suicide since 2003, with the yearly toll regularly crossing the 100-mark every year, as reported by TOI earlier. Three face-offs between officers and jawans have also been reported in the Army over the last one year.
Among them was the one in Nyoma sector of eastern Ladakh in May that ended in a violent clash between officers and jawans of the 226 Field Artillery Regiment, leaving the unit commanding officer, two majors and two jawans hospitalized with limb fractures, bruises and other injuries. The three incidents are a clear indicator of the declining standards of leadership and discipline in the Army, where jawans are no longer willing to be humiliated by their officers.
"The feudal culture which still persists in the Army is causing the problem. While the educational levels and aspirations of jawans has gone up, there is still too much disparity between them and the officers in terms of accommodation, salary and other perks,'' admitted a senior officer.
In fact, a parliamentary report had even castigated the defence ministry for failing to deal with the malaise of stress-related deaths in the Army. It had called for a total revamp of the existing mechanisms to deal with stress and other problems faced by soldiers.
Jawan ends life, Army chief plays it down
Related Reading
Indian Army is fat not fit, says internal audit
Comment: Top heavy Army needs surgical cleansing. This has to be got done by MOD and not by the Army. This feudal culture will carry on and the victims will be the Jawans and their families. A sordid state of affairs indeed. The present set up is aggravating the situation.

Tainted Brigadier Appointed Director of Sainik Welfare

Plum post for "tainted" Brig: Shady past- Indicated by court of Inquiry, he is set to join as sainik welfare director

Army serves 'severe displeasure' to brigadier
Press Trust Of India
New Delhi, October 29, 2010
click here to read the article

Army in a dilemma: Genuine marriage or a ploy to quit the Army

Date : Oct 27th, 2010
Major Yogesh Chandra Madhav Sayankar is set to exchange wedding vows with an Indian-origin American girl on December 10, but the marriage will only take place only if his employer — Indian Army — “expeditiously” deals with his application, the Bombay High Court has said.

An armyman needs permission if he wants to marry a foreign citizen. Sayankar had moved the High Court, as permission from the army was not forthcoming after he applied in March. But due to complexity of his case, and army rules, even a sympathetic division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice Dhananjay Chandrachud could do little.

The court disposed of his case, saying that army should treat his original application seeking permission to marry as an application seeking permission to quit the service, and decide it “preferably” within six weeks.

According to rules, an armyman can marry a foreign citizen, provided the spouse undertakes to become Indian citizen.But in Sayankar’s case, his fiance Shruti is not ready to give up her US citizenship.Army, on the other hand, was not ready to relax its rules.

“These rules concern national security,” pleaded its lawyer, advocate Gauri Godse.Sayankar’s application to army in March sought permission to marry, as well as to quit the service as his fiance was not ready to give up her US citizenship.

But the army’s lawyer said that even permission to quit the service prematurely — after six years’ service — cannot be granted automatically under the rule he had relied on. ”What if after being released from service he doesn’t marry her? This is back-door way of exiting army,” she said.

But judges then pointed out another rule that allows a serviceman to seek premature retirement on the ground that he/she is going to marry a foreign citizen. But in such a case, if allowed to quit, he/she can be asked to pay the expenses incurred on army training.

Sayankar’s lawyer said that he was ready to pay up. The judges then disposed of the petition, asking army to treat his March application under this provision. The judges also said that army “will consider”, while deciding on his resignation, that his fiance was born in India, to Indian parents, and went to the US only following her father’s death in an accident.
No relief for Major who is set to marry US girl

Administrative egotism and mischief must cease

The Tribune Tuesday, July 6, 2010, Chandigarh, India Navdeep Singh
THE new National Litigation Policy has special significance for the defence services, particularly disabled veterans. The policy ordains that frivolous appeals would not be filed by government departments and that appeals on orders of Tribunals shall be an exception rather than the rule. Further, false and misleading pleas or technicalities shall not be espoused.
For long veterans have been at the receiving end of paper violence perpetrated by the government’s legal pundits, who, guided by a strange spirit of sadism, exhaust every single game in the book to ensure benefits do not reach the beneficiaries even when directed by higher judiciary.
To begin with, medical authorities indulge in “literal” rather than “liberal’ interpretation of rules, thereby denying benefits to disabled soldiers. They forget the “spirit” while clinging to the “letter”. When there is a court order granting disability pension, appeals and reviews are filed as a matter of routine even in cases fully covered by earlier judicial rulings.
It is not the higher echelons of governance or the services headquarters that are to blame, but the swarm of section officers, under secretaries and deputy secretaries who rule the roost. The lower-level bureaucracy with its caustic file-notings, unfortunately, runs the government.
That the new policy specially mentions “false” and “misleading” pleas shows the powers that be are aware of the malaise. Appeals are filed not out of legal necessity but because of administrative egotism – How could a petty employee win a case against the mighty officialdom?
Then comes the stage where dubious pleas are presented before the courts, which if not rebutted by a well acquainted legal brain, end in pronouncements which can hardly be termed well-rounded.
This reminds me of some cases with special reference to disabled soldiers. In Secretary MoD Vs Ajit Singh, the defence ministry is on record, stating that disability pension was not released to him since he did not have the minimum required service of 10 years. In reality, there is no minimum service requirement for disability pension and even a recruit is entitled to the same.
In the recent case of Karan Singh Vs UOI, the government espoused that the Army alone provides disability pension to its employees. The truth is that civilian employees are also entitled to exactly the same benefits. In P.K. Kapur Vs UoI the government went hammer and tongs proclaiming it had the right to fix a cut-off date for grant of certain disability benefits that had been refused to pre-1996 retirees. The case went in favour of the government since the Court was never informed that the said benefits through the same master notification had already been extended to similarly placed pre-1996 civilian retirees. The petitioner could not rebut the falsehood since he could not afford a lawyer.
It is not that mischievous elements are playing around only with the judiciary. The higher strata of governance is also not left untouched. In a speech last month, apparently prepared by a similarly inclined officer, the Defence Minster was made to “announce” with pride that the government had introduced an additional amount of Rs 3,000 as constant attendance allowance for disabled soldiers keeping in view their sacrifices. So far so good, but the humble Minister was not in the knowledge that firstly, this allowance is applicable to civilian employees too and hence has nothing to do with valour or sacrifices. Second, the concept is in force since times immemorial and even its enhancement is old news which was announced in March 2008 by the Sixth Pay Commission. Third, it is not applicable to all disabled personnel but only to 100 per cent disabled retirees.
In the past two years there have been other instances where the political executive and the top brass have been misled into announcing beneficial “policy decisions” by hiding from them the fact that the same had actually been necessitated due to Supreme Court decisions.
(Maj Navdeep Singh is a lawyer practicing in the Punjab and Haryana High Court)
Administrative egotism and mischief must cease by Navdeep Singh

Military Law Need to go beyond piecemeal changes
For a century, military law in India has remained stagnant in its colonial character. Unless fundamental changes are brought about to make it more effective and amiable to today’s socio-economic environment, dissatisfaction and litigation could increase.
The Tribune by Vijay Mohan
Military Law Need to go beyond piecemeal changes

IAF officer gets boot for lewd remarks

TNN, Jun 11, 2010, 03.32am IST
NEW DELHI: Even as Army conducts a formal court of inquiry against its engineer-in-chief Lt-Gen A K Nanda after a colonel's wife complained against him, an IAF court martial has ordered a wing commander's dismissal after finding him guilty of "outraging the modesty" of a junior woman officer.

Wing Commander H S Virk, posted in Agra, was tried by the GCM (general court martial) in Bareilly last month, after the woman officer alleged he had passed objectionable comments against her.

While a confirmation of the court-martial sentence by the Allahabad-based Central Air Command chief is awaited, Virk has approached the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), contending he is being kept in "illegal detention" by IAF.

Appearing before the AFT on Virk's behalf, his counsel Rajiv Manglik said the GCM had recommended the wing commander's dismissal but IAF had kept him in confinement even though there was no sentence of imprisonment.

IAF, in turn, contended Virk could not be released as the sentence recommended by the GCM was yet to be confirmed by higher authorities. The AFT, however, directed IAF to release the officer on bail and to send him on leave for two weeks.
IAF officer gets boot for lewd remarks
Col, Lt Col face court martial for Rs 10-crore milk scam: Powder purchased despite adequate stock in store by Vijay Mohan Tribune News Service

Army hit by sex scandal

Army hit by sex scandal
3 Jun 2010, 1425 hrs IST
In a major embarrassment for the Army, the Engineer-in-Chief, Lieutenant General A K Nanda has been accused of sexual misconduct towards the wife of a fellow Army officer. There have been unconfirmed reports that he even has been asked to resign; at any rate the allegations made to Army authorities by the victim seem to be strong enough for the general to now face an internal probe.

If the general is found guilty, he could face a court martial and be forced to either resign or take an early retirement and could even lose his pension.

The lady concerned is the wife of the technical secretary of the Engineer-in-chief, and was allegedly sexually misbehaved with by the accused lieutenant general during a trip to Israel. She thereafter reportedly complained to the Army Chief's wife, who is also the president of the Army Wives' Welfare Association (AWWA).

A serious a charge against such a senior general who is almost on the verge of retirement, warrants two possible responses by authorities; He could be asked to leave the Army immediately, or face a courtmartial. Both options would be a major embarrassment for the Army. But the reputation of the Army is at stake and one can expect the Army Chief to take prompt and stringent action to set the right example.

In the last 20 years there have been several cases where officers have been asked to leave the defence services on account of 'stealing the affections of a brother officer's wife' - as mentioned in the rules and regulations. However cases of sexual misconduct is also a criminal offence and can attract civil prosecution.

Wing Commander (retired) Bakshi, commenting on the development, said "If this lady reports the matter, authorities will take suitable action, they will order a court of inquiry for which suitable officers will be selected. Then, if there is enough evidence against the accused, the Army chief can call for a courtmartial. The general will also get judicial guarantees and an opportunity to defend himself against the allegation. There is a feeling that in the Armed forces people can get away with such things - that is wrong. The standards are very high provided the commanders can maintain them."
Army hit by sex scandal

Lt-Gen accused of molesting aide Col’s wife
The accused, Lt-Gen A K Nanda (59), who as the engineer-in-chief (E-in-C) is among the eight principal staff officers of the Army chief, is alleged to have molested the wife of his aide, Colonel C P S Pasricha, during an official trip to Israel in the second week of May.

There were even indications that the case could be the result of some dirty top-level jostling for the "extremely lucrative" E-in-C post, controlling "all the construction and works projects" of the 1.13-million strong Army spread across the country. In the steeply hierarchical structure of the armed forces, a senior officer being sacked or resigning before his term ends can change the entire chain of succession after him. Nanda is to retire in September.

Nanda’s wife, Neerja, too jumped to her husband’s defence. "The allegations are not true. I was also part of the five-day trip to Israel... I can vouch 100% for my husband’s character. We have been married for 35 years. Let the Army conduct an inquiry... the truth will come out," she said.
Lt-Gen accused of molesting aide Col’s wife: TNN, Jun 3, 2010, 05.37pm IST
Sex scandal in Army takes many twists and turns

Inference from Media Reports
1. Do wives accompany officers on Official Foreign assignments. Even if permission has been granted it behooves on the Senior officer to maintain decorum and honour in keeping with the traditions of the Military in so far as ladies are concerned.
2. The trip primarily seems to be for joint vacation to Egypt for which advance payments had been made.
3. Junior officer's contention of not reporting in foreign soil is genuine. No one will want to throw up dirty linen abroad. Molestation is a serious charge where the accused can be arrested irrespective of status or rank in any country irrespective of one's nationality.
4. The Senior Officer by posting out his Junior Officer to Bhopal on return to Delhi exposes his complicity.
5. Performance of an Officer cannot diminish in a couple of days in a foreign nation.
6. The onus rests with the accused to prove his innocence.

Alcohol Abuse: Military is top liquor guzzler

As reported by Ellavya Atray in dnaindia.com on 07 February 2009: DNA: India
New Delhi: If an adult Indian, on average, consumes a trickle of alcohol in a year, an Indian Jawan guzzles a bucketful.

The military has emerged as the single most organised guzzler of liquor in the country, with an annual consumption of nine litres per head, at least a litre more than the Malayalees, India's biggest alcohol-consuming community.

Though alcohol consumption is still not well documented in the country, the average per capita consumption (for population aged 15 and above) is a little less than a litre, according to World Health Organisation figures.

Reply to a detailed questionnaire on the sale of liquor in military canteens, filed by DNA under the Right To Information (RTI) Act, shows that our soldiers consumed a staggering 1.1 crore bottles of hard liquor -- rum, vodka, whiskey, and brandy -- in 2007, not to mention 1.2 million bottles of beer and sundry wines.

No wonder, then, the recent cut in liquor quota sold in military canteens dampened the spirits of the men and women in uniform.

Rum continues to be the most preferred choice, though it's gradually losing the kick. Vodka sales, on the other hand, have seen a threefold rise in the last four years.

"Many army wives drink, and they prefer vodka," said an officer who looks after a few canteens. "It is light compared to whisky and rum."

Surprisingly, Old Monk, the old favourite of beginners and veterans alike, is not the most sold rum. That crown goes to the military's own Contessa.
Military is top liquor guzzler

Alcohol and Drug Abuse
The role of unit command is to provide well-trained, physically fit and mentally alert Jawans and Officers who can successfully accomplish their assigned duty. Jawans who abuse alcohol and drugs will negatively impact on the successful attainment of this objective. Specifically abusers effect morale, cohesion, performance and unit readiness. Their actions could result in serious injury to civilians, other members and or to themselves. Therefore alcohol and drug abuse should not be tolerated by Unit/ formation Commanders.

Jawans and Officers should not misuse/ consume alcohol under the following conditions:
1. If the member is under the age of 21.
2. Within 12 hours of reporting for duty or while on duty.
3. While in uniform.
4. When the mission requirements dictate.
5. Within 12 hours of operating a motor vehicle or while operating a motor vehicle.
6. When restricted by the commander

Liquor should not used for trading, services or bartering especially with civilians, servants and vendors for favours or used for bribing in lieu of cash. Selling liquor in the civil market for monetary gains is a punishable crime. (There is rampant misuse of liquor in the Military Training Institutions starting from premier Staff College to the lesser ones).

Substance abuse or excessive drinking is considered unbecoming conduct. Members who violate this policy should be subjected to strict disciplinary action under the Army Act. Recent cases as reported by media prove that drunken Officers and Jawans break the rule of the land by committing civil crimes.

Attempt to subvert the Army Judicial & Disciplinary System

Dear Chander,
Sending herewith a link from The Hindu Online, January 29, 2010 for your perusal and dissemination: Antony’s advice to Army Chief irks ex-servicemen - The Hindu Online, January 29, 2010.

Gen Satbir has, indeed, done everyone of us proud in articulating the attempt to subvert the Army Judicial & Disciplinary system. It was very timely and had to be done to support and boost the personal morale of the Army Chief, who has been under tremendous pressure from all quarters.
Regards,
Chris D'Silva
(Capt Christopher Lucian Newman D'Silva IN, Watertown MA 02472, USA)

The Sukhna Episode- the legal issues

The Sukna episode– it is not a SCAM, irrespective of what the media says- needs to be examined dispassionately, from the legal angle. This is especially so after the Defence Minister’s ‘advice’ to the COAS to court martial the present MS, Lt Gen Avadesh Prakash. Before discussing the issue, let us get some facts right...

Unlike other Class 1 Officers of the central services, officers of the Armed Forces are not government servants. In fact, they are the ‘first’ public servants of the Union. (Their commissions are signed personally by the President). According to the Defence Services Regulations, Regulations for the Army, Para 4 (b), ‘The Chief of Army Staff is responsible to the President through the Central Government for the command, discipline, recruitment, training, organisation, administration and preparations for war of the Army.’ (Though the COAS is responsible to the President through Government, it is not the same thing as to the Government).

The Defence Minister has no power of command over the COAS. There have been instances in the past when the COAS has disregarded the advice of the Defence Minister. I am giving below an extract from the biography of Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw that forms part of my book Leadership In The Indian Army– Biographies Of Twelve Soldiers:

Sam was due to retire in June 1972, but was given an extension of six months. He was not keen to continue and had made known his desire to the Prime Minister. However, she wanted him to stay on and told Sam that he would not be allowed to proceed on retirement. When Sam told her that he had no intention of staying on and there was no law under which he could be forced to do so, there was some consternation. Finally someone found a way out. It was reasoned that if Sam received a direct order from the President who was also the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, he would have to obey. The President's consent was obtained and his directions published in the Gazette of India, indicating that Sam would continue to hold the office of Chief of Army Staff till the President was pleased to dispense with his services.

A court martial sometimes benefits the accused officer. In such cases, summary punishments or administrative action is the preferred option. Under Army Act 84, officers of the rank of major and below can be awarded up to one year forfeiture of seniority, subject to the right of the accused to elect to be tried by court martial. In many cases, officers choose this option. Why? Because it difficult to secure conviction in a court martial, in the absence of strong evidence. In the case of Gen Avadesh Prakash, all that he is being blamed for is sifarish (recommendation), which will be charged under Section 45 (Unbecoming Conduct). Usually, this section is invoked in cases of moral turpitude, which cannot be proved in the present case. All that he did was make an improper recommendation. There was no element of coercion, since he was not the superior officer of GOC 33 Corps, the latter could have refused to comply with his recommendation.

Coming to General Rath, the charges against him are even more difficult to prove. As the GOC, he was vested with the authority to give the NOC. There was no obligation on him to take the concurrence of the Army Commander, as is being made out. The bogey about National Security is misplaced. Surely, as the senior military officer on the spot, he is best suited to decide on the issue. Is the media more competent to decide this or even the Army Commander or COAS? The Corps HQ is nothing but an office. It is not really a ‘sensitive’ place, like a nuclear establishment or missile facility. In fact, Delhi has several places that are much more sensitive close to civil areas. A high tech facility of the Army is in Anand Parbat. The British High Commissioner lives within a stone’s throw of Sena Bhawan, below the offices of the Military Intelligence and Signal Intelligence Directorates. With the technology available today, even normal conversations can be picked up from window pane vibrations.

It will be extremely difficult to secure convictions through courts martial. Even if the concerned officers are convicted, they will certainly appeal to the Armed Forces Tribunal, or the High/ Supreme Court, which is likely to set aside the judgment. According to Para 103 (a) of the Regulations for the Army, the President may call upon any officer to retire or resign his commission at any time without assigning any reason. Why was this option not adopted by the Defence Minister? After the 1962 debacle, the COAS General PN Thapar was reportedly asked to quit as was the Corps Commander, Lt Gen BM Kaul. Surely, their actions, which cost us hundreds of lives and national ignominy, were graver.

Maj Gen VK Singh (Retd)

Evolution of Military Law and necessity of the Armed Forces Tribunal

Chandigarh based noted lawyer Navdeep Singh places a perspective on the recently constituted Armed Forces Tribunal and traces the evolution of the practice of military law for the armed forces personnel.
It would not exactly be appropriate to say that the three military Acts are without enough checks to avoid miscarriage of justice. There are ample provisions parallel to those available under the criminal system of jurisprudence but the problem remains that unlike the criminal courts, court martials are presided over not by judicial officers but by officers of the regular army who neither have the acumen nor the bent towards legal and judicial modalities. Moreover, all procedures finally leading to conviction by a court martial (such as Courts of Inquiry, Summary of Evidence etc) are handled by military personnel who may just follow provisions of military Acts and Rules in formal letter but not in spirit - and this makes all the difference. And this also brings us to the answer why a body of professionals such as the AFT is so very urgently required to sit in judgement and appeal over justice rendered to men and women in uniform by another set of men and women in uniform.
Read full article:
Armed Forces Tribunal

Members of the Armed Forces Tribunal appointed

Monday, June 22, 2009 Ministry of Defence
The Government has approved the appointment of following as Judicial and Administrative Members in the Armed Forces Tribunal (Principal Bench and Various Regional Benches), in scale of pay Rs. 26,000/- (fixed) (pre revised), for a period of 4 years from the date of assumption of the post or till the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier.

Judicial Members
1. Mr. Justice Janardan Sahai
2. Mr. Justice K Padmanabhan Nair (Retd)
3. Mr. Justice Shilendra Shanker Kulshrestha (Retd)
4. Mr. Justice Ghanshyam Prasad (Retd)
5. Mr. Justice Manak Lall Mohta
6. Mr. Justice AC Arumugaperumal Adityan
7. Mr. Justice Anwar Ahmad (Retd)
8. Mr. Justice Bhanwaroo Khan

Administrative Members
1. Lt. Gen (Retd) S Pattabhiraman
2. Lt. Gen (Retd) Amrik Singh Bahia
3. Lt. Gen (Retd) Madan Gopal
4. Lt. Gen (Retd) Susheel Gupta
5. Lt. Gen (Retd) M L Naidu
6. Lt. Gen (Retd) HS Panag
7. Lt. Gen ( Retd) Thomas Mathew
8. Lt. Gen ( Retd) PR Gangadharan
9. Lt. Gen ( Retd) SS Dhillon
10. Lt. Gen (Retd) ZU Shah
11. Lt. Gen (Retd) RK Chhabra
12. Lt. Gen (Retd) NS Brar
13. Vice Adm (Retd) RF Contractor
14. Lt. Gen (Retd) BS Sisodia
15. Commodore (Retd) Mohan Phadke

The Union Cabinet gave its approval for the creation of 31 posts for the Armed Forces Tribunal on June 24, 2008 paving the way for the creation of the proposed independent adjudicating forum for dispensing cost effective and speedy justice to the armed forces personnel. The posts include 1 of Chairperson and 29 posts of members for the Principal Bench at New Delhi and 8 Regional Branches. It also includes one post of Principal Registrar at the Principal Bench.

The Principal Bench at New Delhi will have three courts and will have jurisdiction over High Courts in the State of Delhi. Similarly, the Chandigarh and Lucknow Benches will have 3 courts each. The Chandigarh Bench will have jurisdiction over Punjab, Haryana, J&K and Himachal Pradesh. The Lucknow Bench will have jurisdiction over Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal, Madhya Pradesh and Chhatisgarh. The other locations for the Benches with one court each will be Kolkata, Guwahati, Mumbai, Kochi, Chennai and Jaipur. The Kolkata Bench will have jurisdiction over West Bengal, Orissa, Jharkhand, Bihar and Andaman & Nicobar Islands. The Guwahati Bench will have jurisdiction over Assam, Manipur, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh. The Mumbai Bench will have jurisdiction over Maharashtra, Goa and Gujarat. While Kochi Bench will have jurisdiction over Kerala and Karnataka, Chennai Bench will look after Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. The Jaipur Bench will have jurisdiction over Rajasthan.

The setting up of the Armed Forces Tribunal has fulfilled a long-felt need of the country’s three defence services. Over 9,800 cases filed by Service personnel are pending before various High Courts. The maximum number of cases numbering 2487 will be transferred to the Chandigarh Bench while 2407 will be adjudicated by the Lucknow Bench. Two thousand three hundred and six (2,306) cases are proposed to be transferred to the Delhi Principal Bench.

The Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 which was passed by the Parliament during the Winter Session of 2007 received the assent of the President on 25th December, 2007. The Act was notified on 28th December, 2007. It provides for adjudication or trial by the tribunal of disputes and complaints with respect to commission, appointments, enrolment and conditions of service in respect of persons subject to Three Services Acts as also for appeals arising out of orders, findings or sentences of court martial held under the said Acts and for matters connected with them. The Act came into force with effect from 15th June, 2008. The Tribunal will have original jurisdiction in service matters and appellate jurisdiction in court martial matters. Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar Mathur was appointed as the Chairman of the Tribunal. The Tribunal will consist of 1 Chairperson, 14 judicial and 15 administrative members. The administrative members shall be officer of the rank of Major General or above in the Army or equivalent rank in the Navy or the Air Force with three years of service in that rank. JAG of three Services with at least one year of service as JAG shall also be eligible. The judicial member should be serving or retired judge of the High Court. All appointments to the Tribunal are made in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. The Tribunal has powers to punish for its contempt.
****
Samir / RAJ
Members of the Armed Forces Tribunal appointed

Comment: JAG branch needs to be streamlined and its officers impove their professional skills to ensure the system is just and free from influence and corruption.