Kerala High Court
Ex No:2587173 A Lance Naik Ramakrishnan ... vs Union Of India on 22 October, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
Tuesday, the 22nd day of October 2024 / 30th Aswina, 1946
WP(C) NO. 23871 OF 2024 (H)
PETITIONER:
EX NO:2587173 A LANCE NAIK RAMAKRISHNAN KG, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O
LATE. K GOVINDAN, RS NIVAS, NEDUMGOLAM, PARAVOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT,
KERALA, PIN - 691 334.
RESPONDENTS:
1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE,
SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110 011.
2. THE CHIEF OF ARMY STAFF, INTEGRATED HEAD QUARTERS (ARMY), SOUTH
BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110 011.
3. O IC DSC RECORDS, MILL ROAD, BURNACHERRY P.O, KANNUR, PIN - 670
013.
4. THE DIRECTOR (DSC), HQ K & K SUB AREA (DSC), C/O 56 APO, PIN - 900
493.
Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to direct the 4th respondent to comply with Exhibit P-1 order
passed by Hon'ble AFT within a reasonable time frame.
This petition again coming on for orders upon perusing the petition
and the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and this court's order dated
25.09.2024 and upon hearing the arguments of SRI.RATHEESH B., Advocate for
the petitioner, SRI.C.DINESH, Advocate for the 1st respondent and of
SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ, AMICUS CURIAE, the court passed the following:
Nitin Jamdar, C.J. & S. Manu, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W.P.(C)No. 23871 of 2024-H
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2024
ORDER
Nitin Jamdar, C.J.
Heard Sri. B. Ratheesh, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Sri. C. Dinesh, learned Central Government Counsel and Senior Advocate Sri. M.R. Hariraj, learned Amicus Curiae.
2. In this writ petition, the main grievance of the Petitioner is that even though there is an order of the Armed Forces Tribunal (Tribunal) in their favour which has not been challenged by the Union of India, they are unable to get any relief as there is no coercive power with the Tribunal to enforce execution of its own orders. Since this issue is raised in various petitions and a detailed order is passed on 4 September 2024, the learned counsel for the Petitioner states that there are several such applications for execution of the orders pending before the Tribunal's Bench at Kochi.
3. As per Section 29 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 (Act of 2007), the order of the Tribunal disposing of an application shall be final. The Armed Forces Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2008 (Rules of 2008) have been framed under the Act of 2007 to follow certain sequence and deal with contingencies as per the procedure followed. Rule 21 of the Rules of 2008 deals with the manner in signing of the W.P.(C)No.23871 of 2024 2 order. Rule 22 thereafter is for publication of orders. Rule 23 contemplates communication of orders to the parties and thereafter Rule 25 has been incorporated as follows:
"25. Powers of the Tribunal with regard to certain orders and directions.- Nothing in these rules shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent powers of the Tribunal to make such orders or give such directions as may be necessary or expedient to give effect to its orders or to prevent abuse of its process or to secure the ends of justice."
4. Reading these Rules in sequence would indicate sufficient powers to the Tribunal for giving such directions to ensure compliance of the orders. There is no separate provision in the Act of 2007 or in the Rules of 2008 specifically dealing with the execution of the orders, reason perhaps being that it was not necessary since the direction would invariably be to the Government Authorities which are supposed to comply with the orders of the Tribunal. Therefore, if there is no specific provision dealing with the execution of the orders of the Tribunal, it does not mean that the orders of the Tribunal can be disregarded at will.
5. However non-implementation of the orders of the Tribunal forces the parties to come to this Court for execution of the orders of the Tribunal. This Court can thereafter, if the order is not complied with, invoke the contempt jurisdiction. It would be indeed unfortunate that repeatedly contempt jurisdiction is exercised against the Government only to ensure that the orders of the Tribunal are complied with. Be that as it may, it appears that this power will have to be exercised if there is a W.P.(C)No.23871 of 2024 3 repeated failure to implement the orders of the Tribunal.
6. Since this Court has taken note of large pendency of matters and has requested an Amicus Curiae to appear and assist the Court, the issue travels beyond this individual case. The Registry will send a communication to the Registry of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Kochi to send the details of all applications seeking enforcement of the order passed by the Tribunal such as names of the applicant, the date of filing, number, etc. After this list is received, the Court may consider directing the Tribunal to issue direction to set up a time bound compliance in each application. Thereafter the Court will also consider to declare that the non-compliance of such direction by the Tribunal under orders of this Court will be considered as contempt of this Court.
7. For the Registry to send the communication and report to be received, hearing of this petition is deferred for a period of four weeks.
8. Post on 22 November 2024.
Sd/-
Nitin Jamdar Chief Justice Sd/-
S. Manu
Judge
vpv
22-10-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar