LT COL SAURABH DUTT vs. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

$~53 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: 13.09.2023 + W.P.(C) 12009/2023 & CM APPL. 47098/2023 LT COL SAURABH DUTT ..... Petitioner Versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner: In person. For the Respondents: Mr. Sushil Kumar Pandey, Senior Panel Counsel and Ms. Neha Yadav, Advocate with Major Partho Katuyayan. CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi to expedite the proceedings and adjudicate the matter within a specified time period. 2. Reference may be had to the judgement of the Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Parashotam Das , 2023 SCC Online SC 314 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 12009/2023 Page 1 of 4 Digitally Signed By:RASHIM KAPOOR Signing Date:12.10.2023 17:56:24 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the powers of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are not inhibited, however, the Supreme Court has placed a caveat that superintendence and control under Article 227 of the Constitution are somewhat distinct from the powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has observed as under:

Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 12009/2023 Page 2 of 4 Digitally Signed By:RASHIM KAPOOR Signing Date:12.10.2023 17:56:24 In any case, the High Courts have been reluctant to entertain writ petitions against orders under Section 15 of the said Act, and have refused to become a court of second appeal.” 15. Lastly, it was submitted that the issues are no more res integra in view of the recent Constitution Bench Judgment of five-Judges' Bench of this Court in Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Ltd. where in paragraph 215, following L. Chandra Kumar, this Court settled that the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 does not limit the power of the High Court, expressly or by implication, against military or armed forces dispute and that the restriction under Article 227(4) is only qua administrative supervision by the High Courts and not qua judicial review. Para 215 reads as under: “215. It is hence clear post L. Chandra Kumar that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 does not limit the powers of High Courts expressly or by implication against military or armed forces disputes. The limited ouster made by Article 227(4) only operates qua administrative supervision by the High Court and not judicial review. Article 136(2) prohibits direct appeals before the Supreme Court from an order of armed forces tribunals, but would not prohibit an appeal to the Supreme Court against the judicial review exercised by the High Court under Article 226.” 3. In view of the said observation of the Supreme Court, it is clear Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 12009/2023 Page 3 of 4 Digitally Signed By:RASHIM KAPOOR Signing Date:12.10.2023 17:56:24 that this Court has the power of judicial review under Article 226 but would not have the power of superintendence and control as exercisable under Article 227 over the Armed Forces Tribunal. 4. The relief that the petitioner is seeking, primarily, falls within the purview of Article 227 and as such the petition before this Court would not be maintainable. 5. The petition is accordingly dismissed. SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MANOJ JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 13, 2023/ NA Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 12009/2023 Page 4 of 4 Digitally Signed By:RASHIM KAPOOR Signing Date:12.10.2023 17:56:24