ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL …aftlko.up.nic.in/C2 Daily Order/c2 Order-2017/C2...Shri Manish Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri RKS Chauhan, learned

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2

M.A. No. 515 of 2016 with M.A. No. 1767 of 2016

(Inre: O.A. No. Nil of 2016)

Sharad Prakash Pal Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus

Union of India & Others Respondents

By Legal Practitioner for Respondents

Notes of the

Registry

Orders of the Tribunal

20.09.2017

Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.V.S Rathore, Member (J)

Hon’ble Lt Gen Gyan Bhushan, Member (A)

List has been revised.

Present: Shri Manish Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri RKS Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith

Maj Rajshri Nigam, Departmental Representative.

Shri Manish Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant prays that

the matter be listed in the month of October for hearing on delay

condonation. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection.

Accordingly, the case is adjourned for the day.

List this case on 24.10.2017 for orders.

(Lt Gen Gyan Bhushan) (Justice S.V.S Rathore)

Member (A) Member (J) RPM/-

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

M.A. No. 745 of 2016 With M.A. No. 1730 of 2016

Munisha Devi Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.09.2017



List has been revised. None appears on behalf of the applicant.

Present: Shri Anurag Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents

alongwith Maj Rajshri Nigam, Departmental Representative.

On 18.08.2017, learned counsel for the applicant was directed to

file replication to the objection on application for condonation of delay

but the same has not been filed. However, in the interest of justice the

case is adjourned for the day.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

M.A. No. 206 of 2017

(Inre: Dy No. 2769 of 2016 and O.A. No. Nil of 2016)

Sunil Tewari Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.09.2017




Present: Shri Ravi Prakash Tripathi, Advocate, holding brief of

Shri Virat Anand Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri

Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith


In compliance of the Court order dated 21.07.2017 and

17.08.2017, receipt of the cost imposed for recall of the order dated

08.11.2016 has not been filed.

Shri Ravi Prakash Tripathi, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Virat

Anand Singh, learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is

granted four days’ further time to comply the order of the Court.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

M.A. No. 216 of 2017

(Inre: M.A. No. 1892 of 2016 and M.A. No. 2407 of 2016)

Smt Kamla Devi Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.09.2017




Present: Shri Ravi Prakash Tripathi, Advocate, holding brief of

Shri Virat Anand Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Md

Zafar Khan, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 and 2 alongwith

Maj Rajshri Nigam, Departmental Representative and Shri Ziauddin

Khan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.

In compliance of the Court order dated 10.07.2017, receipt of the

cost imposed for recall of the order dated 24.11.2016 has not been

filed.

Shri Ravi Prakash Tripathi, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Virat

Anand Singh, learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is

granted four days’ further time to comply the order of the Court.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

M.A. No. 267 of 2013 with M.A. No. 76 of 2017

Kitab Singh Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.09.2017




Present: Shri KK Misra, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Namit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith


Shri Namit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents prays for

and is granted four weeks’ further time as a last opportunity to file

objection with the judgment of Hon’ble High Court and The Apex

Court on the point of maintainability of the O.A..




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No 221 of 2015

Smt. Moti Singh Applicant

By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.09.2017

Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.V.S. Rathore, Member (J)


Present: Shri R.P. Singh Kuruvanshi, learned counsel for the

applicant and Shri Rajiv Pandey, learned counsel for the

respondents.

As prayed by learned counsel for the parties, list this case on

26.10.2017 for orders.

On the date fixed, a rep of PCDA (P) Allahabad shall remain

present to assist the court.

(Lt Gen Gyan Bhushan) (Justice S.V.S. Rathore)

Member (A) Member (J) SB

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No 136 of 2017

Jyoti Yadav Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.09.2017



Present: Shri Onkar Pandey, learned counsel for the

applicant and Shri G.S. Sikarwar, learned counsel for the

respondents.

Learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted

four weeks’ further time to file rejoinder affidavit.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 27 of 2017

Sandeep Kumar Petitioner

By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.09.2017



Memo of appearance filed by Shri Amit Jaiswal on behalf of

respondents is taken on record. His name be shown as learned

counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

Present: Shri Anoop Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for

the petitioner and Shri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the

respondents.

On call of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner prays

for and is granted four weeks’ further time to file Bench copy of

the T.A. Learned counsel for the applicant shall also provide a

copy of T.A. to learned counsel for the respondents by the next

date.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 531 of 2010

Sultan Ram Petitioner


Versus

Secy Govt of India & Others Respondents


Notes of the

Registry


20.09.2017



Present: Shri P.N. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Shri D.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the

respondents.

As prayed by learned counsel for the respondents, a weeks’

further time is granted to ascertain the facts in terms of

Tribunal’s order dated 11.09.2017.

List this case on 03.10.2017 for hearing.

On the date fixed, learned counsel for the respondents shall

produce original records pertaining to the case for perusal of the

Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 1279 of 2010

Naresh Kumar Petitioner


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


20.09.2017




petitioner and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the

respondents assisted by Maj Rajshri Nigam, Departmental

Representative.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Arguments concluded.

Order reserved.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2


(Inre: T.A. No. 659 of 2010)

Mahesh Chandra Petitioner


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



Memo of appearance filed on behalf of the petitioner by Shri

Vikash Singh Chauhan, Advocate, is taken on record.

Present: Shri Ashok Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Shri Vikash Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondents


M.A. No. 1564 of 2017

This is an application for condonation of delay in moving the

application under section 31(2) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act

2007 for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated

26.02.2013 passed by this Court in T.A. No. 659 of 2010.

As per stamp reporter’s report, there is delay of 04 years, 05

months and 17 days in filing the application for leave to appeal.

Section 31 (2) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007 provides that

the application for leave to appeal shall be made for approaching

Hon’ble Supreme Court within a period of 30 days beginning with the

date of decision of the Tribunal. Apart from it, we have also gone

through the grounds and reasons indicated in the affidavit filed in

support of the application. In our considered opinion, the grounds

urged in support of the prayer for grant of leave to appeal do not

appear to be germane in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in Office of the Chief Post Master General and

others vs Living Media India Ltd and another reported in 2012

STPL (LE) 46200 SC. SC, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has

held that the law of limitation undoubtedly binds everybody including

the Government. Apart from it, we have also gone through the grounds

and reasons indicated in the affidavit filed in support of the

application. In our considered opinion, the grounds urged in support of

the prayer for grant of leave to appeal are general in nature and do not

appear to be germane.

In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the

aforesaid case, the application for condonation of delay cannot be

entertained and it is hereby rejected.

M.A. No. 1565 of 2017

This is an application under section 31 (1) of the Armed Forces

Tribunal Act 2007 for grant of leave to appeal, having been moved by

the applicant beyond the period of 30 days. Since the application for

condonation of delay in moving this application has been rejected, in

consequence thereof, this application is also liable to be rejected.

Accordingly, this application is also rejected.


Member (A) Member (J) PKG

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. (A) No. 39 of 2017

Smt Sunita Singh W/o Abhishek Kumar Singh (In Custody) Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



Present: Dr Ashish Asthana, learned counsel for the applicant and

Dr Gyan Singh, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj

Rajshri Nigam, Departmental Representative.

Counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents filed today in

Court, is taken on record, a copy of which has been provided to the

learned counsel for the applicant, who prays for and is granted four

weeks’ time to file rejoinder affidavit.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 385 of 2011

Sharma Naresh Kumar Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



Present: Shri VA Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri DK Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj


Learned counsel for the applicant has moved an application dated

23.05.2017 for amendment.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the amendment

application is allowed. Let necessary amendments be carried out

within two weeks.

Along with the amendment application, photostat copy of the

railway ticket has been filed. Learned counsel for the respondents has

raised objection to the said document. Admissibility of the said

document shall be considered at the time of final hearing.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2


(Inre: M.A. No. 831 of 2015)

Chakradhar Prasad Yadav Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



List has been revised

Present: Shri Virat Anand Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant and Shri Siddharth Dhaon, learned counsel for the

respondents alongwith Maj Rajshri Nigam, Departmental

Representative.

Shri Virat Anand Singh, learned counsel for the applicant prays

for and is granted two weeks’ further time to file better affidavit in

support of the application for condonation of delay in filing the

restoration application.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

M.A. No. 686 of 2017

(Inre: O.A. No. Nil of 2017)

Mithlesh Devi Alias Lali Devi Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017




Present: Shri R Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Ashish Saxena, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith

Maj Rajshri Nigam, Departmental representative.

Shri R Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is

granted two weeks’ further time to file reply to the objection against

the application for condonation of delay.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 61 of 2014

Sukhvir Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



List has been revised. None appears on behalf of the applicant.

Present: Dr Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the

respondents alongwith Maj rajshri Nigam, Departmental

Representative.

Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted four

weeks’ further time to file status report as directed by this Court on

04.08.2017.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 189 of 2010 With M.A. No. 107 of 2012

Shiv Kumar Joshi Applicants By Legal Practitioner for Applicants

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



Present: Col RN Singh(Retd), learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri Anand Vikram, learned counsel for the respondents




Order reserved.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 40 of 2016

Nitu Kumar Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



Present: Shri R Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr

Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the respondents


Written arguments filed by Dr Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned

counsel for the respondents, in Court today, is taken on record.



produce original documents pertaining to the case for perusal of the

Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 90 of 2017 With M.A. No. 1150 of 2017

Smt Anju Rani Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



Present: Shri Ashok Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondents


M.A. No. 1150 of 2017

Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the respondents is

taken on record. Shri Ashok Singh, learned counsel for the applicant

prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to file rejoinder affidavit.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. (A) No. 241 of 2016 With M.A. No. 1499 of 2017

Ranjeet Kumar Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



Present: Shri Rohit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj


M.A. No. 1499 of 2017

Supplementary counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the

respondents is taken on record. Shri Rohit Kumar, learned counsel for

the applicant prays for and is granted two weeks’ time to file reply to

the aforesaid supplementary counter affidavit.




Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 9 of 2017

Smt Sharda Devi Petitioner By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



Memo of appearance filed by Shri Kaushik Chatterji, Advocate,

on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. His name be shown as

counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

Present: Shri VA Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Shri Kaushik Chatterji, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith

Wg Cdr Sardul Singh, Departmental Representative.

Shri VA Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is

granted two weeks’ time to file reply to the objection against the

application for condonation of delay filed by learned counsel for the

respondents and also file reply on impleadment of Smt Madhubala

Yadav who is the necessary party in the present case.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 39 of 2017

Govind Singh Negi Petitioner By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


19.09.2017



Present: Shri Shariq Khan, Advocate, holding brief of Shri SG

Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri VPS Vats, learned

counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj Rajshri Nigam,

Departmental Representative.

Shri Shariq Khan, Advocate, holding brief of Shri SG Singh,

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his senior Shri SG

Singh has not come to the Court and prays for adjournment.

Accordingly, this case is adjourned for the day.




Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

Ex-A No.26 of 2017

Inre O.A.No.239 of 2015

Santosh Kumar Tiwari Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017



Present: Shri Sudhir Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant and Dr Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the

respondents.

Ex-A No.26 of 2017

This is an Execution Application under Section 29 of the Armed

Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 filed by the applicant for non

implementation of the judgment and order dated 30th

September 2016

passed in O.A. No.239 of 2015 which relates to the grant of disability

pension.

At the threshold of the arguments, learned counsel for the

respondents submitted that financial concurrence is awaited for issuing

Government order.

Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted

two months’ further time for compliance of the aforesaid order. In

case said order is not complied within the stipulated time, learned

counsel for the respondents shall have to pay Rs.10,000/- as cost.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

M.A.No.1043 of 2017

Inre O.A.No. (Nil) of 2017

Smt Krishna Thapa Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017



Present: Dr Ashish Asthana, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri VPS Vats, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj



weeks’ further time to file objection to the application for condonation

of delay.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A.No. 1 of 2016

With M.A.No.1868 of 2016

Shyam Sunder Mishra Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017




Shri DK Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj


In pursuance of the order dated 18.04.2017 of this Tribunal,

Photostat copy of Annexure-4 of the counter affidavit was sent to

Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh for examination of

handwriting Expert. It is reported that in absence of original

document, no definite opinion can be given regarding the said

document.

Therefore, we hereby direct the Registry to provide the original

record in a sealed cover to the respondents for onward submission to

the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh for handwriting

Expert opinion. It is further directed that photostat copy of the said

document shall be kept on record.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A.No. 116 of 2017

Smt Sadhana Sharma Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017



Present: Shri R Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri AN Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj


Learned counsel for the respondents has failed to comply with the

order dated 01.09.2017 and prays for and is granted one week’s further

time to comply with the order.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A.No.147 of 2017

With M.A.No.1273 of 2017

Smt. Gomati Devi,

Mother of Late Sanjay Kumar Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017



Present: Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant and Shri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondents


Counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the respondents

is taken on record.

Learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted two

weeks’ time to file rejoinder affidavit.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A.No.45 of 2016

Smt Basundhara Pokhrel Petitioner By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017



Present: None for the petitioner and Shri Amit Jaiswal, learned

counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj Rajshri Nigam,

Departmental Representative.

Notice issued to the petitioner has not been received back served

or un-served. Let fresh notice be issued to the petitioner by registered

post by the Registry returnable by the next date fixed.


Name of Shri Amit Jaiswal be shown as learned counsel for the

respondents when the case is listed next.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 349 of 2010

Ramayan Mishra Petitioner By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017



Present: Shri Virat Anand Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant and Shri Anurag Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents


Shri Anurag Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents prays

for and is granted a week’s time to comply the order of this Tribunal

dated 31.08.2017.

List this case on 28.09.2017 for further hearing.



Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A.(A). No. 327 of 2015

Arun Kumar Singh Applicant By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017




Shri Anurag Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith




Order reserved.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 72 of 2013

Smt Suman Devi Petitioner By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017



Present: Shri PK Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr

Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the respondents




Order reserved.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 75 of 2016

Rajesh Kumar Petitioner By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017



Present: Shri Rohit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Dr SN Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj


Shri Rohit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and

is granted two weeks’ further time to comply the Tribunal’s order

dated 28.07.2017




Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 14 of 2017 with M.A. No. 1244 of 2017

Jairam Pal Petitioner By Legal Practitioner for Petitioner

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.09.2017



Present: Shri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Dr Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the

respondents alongwith Maj Rajshri Nigam, Departmental

Representative.



Order reserved.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

Dy No 2360 of 2016 with M.A. No 363 of 2017 Inre O.A. No 135 of 2014

Rajendra Pratap Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017



Present: Shri V.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri A.K. Gupta and Shri D.C. Lohumi, learned counsel for

the respondents.


two weeks’ further time to file rejoinder affidavit.

List this case on 05.10.2017 for orders


Member (A) Member (J) ukt

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

M.A. No. 1974 of 2015

Smt Brijesh Balyan Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017



Present: Shri K.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the

respondents.


three weeks’ further time to file preliminary objection on

maintainability of the case.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

M.A. No. 296 of 2017 Inre O.A. (Nil) of 2017

Smt Sunita Jaiswal Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017



Vakalatnama filed by Shri V.A. Singh on behalf of learned

counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Office is directed to

show his name as learned counsel for the applicant when the case

is listed next.

Present: Shri V.A. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri Namit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.


two weeks time to file reply to objection on application for

condonation of delay.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

M.A. No 869 of 2017 Inre O.A. (Nil) of 2017

Dhananjay Mishra Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017



Present: Col YR Sharma (Retd), learned counsel for the

applicant and Ms Appoli Shrivastava, learned counsel for the

respondents.


two weeks further time to file reply to objection on application

for condonation of delay.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 116 of 2013

Karamati Iqbal Khan Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017



Present: Shri K.K. Singh Bisht, learned counsel for the

applicant and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the

respondents.


four weeks’ time to file counter affidavit.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 105 of 2016 with M.A. No 1216 of 2017

Lt Col Rajeev Bhola Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017



Present: The applicant Lt Col Rajeev Bhola in person and

Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, learned counsel for the respondents.

The applicant Lt Col Rajeev Bhola present in person submits

that his counsel Shri Harshvardhan is not available today and

prays for adjournment of the case. Learned counsel for the

respondents has no objection. Accordingly, the case is

adjourned.

As prayed, list this case on 10.10.2017 for orders.

By the meantime learned counsel for the applicant shall file

rejoinder affidavit.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 214 of 2016 with M.A. No 1558 of 2017

Smt Rajni Verma Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017




applicant and Shri Himanshu Vaish, learned counsel for

Respondent No 2.

M.A. No 1558 of 2017

Reply to objection on maintainability of the case filed by

learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

He prays for and is granted three weeks time to file

rejoinder affidavit in reply to counter affidavit filed by learned

counsel for Respondent No 2.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. (A) 192 of 2014

Brijesh Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017



Present: Shri R.P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant

and Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the

respondents.



Order reserved.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 700 of 2010

Anand Kumar Srivastava Petitioner


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017



Present: Shri K.K. Singh Bisht, holding brief of Shri

Manjive Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri D.K.

Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents.

On call of the case, Shri K.K. Singh Bisht, submits that

learned counsel for the petitioner is out of station today and prays

for adjournment of the case. Learned counsel for the respondents

has no objection. Accordingly, the case is adjourned.


By the meantime learned counsel for the petitioner shall file

reply to objection on substitution application.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 80 of 2016

Anoop Kumar Petitioner


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


15.09.2017



Present: Shri R.P. Singh holding brief of Shri Ram Dheeraj

Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri D.K. Pandey,

learned counsel for the respondents.

On call of the case Shri R.P. Singh, Advocate submits that

learned counsel for the applicant is out of station today and prays

for adjournment of the case. Learned counsel for the respondents

has no objection. Accordingly, the case is adjourned.


By the meantime learned counsel for the petitioner shall file

rejoinder affidavit.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 329 of 2015

Lt Col Ram Raj Singh (Retd) Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



O.A. No. 329 of 2015, Lt Col Ram Raj Singh (Retd) vs.

Union of India and others is allowed.

For order, see our order of date passed on separate sheets.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 310 of 2015

Pratap Singh Chauhan Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri Bachchan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondents.

This Original Application has been filed with the prayer for

endorsement of name of second wife of the applicant, Smt. Pushpa

Devi in the PPO and accordingly issue of Corrigendum PPO to the

applicant.

It is a fit case for adjudication.

Admit.


weeks’ time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may

be filed by learned counsel for the applicant within two weeks,

thereafter.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 236 of 2016 with M.A. No. 209 of 2017

Kunal Krishna Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Dr. Ashish Asthana, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri D.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents.

This Original Application has been filed with the prayer for

endorsement of name of second wife of the applicant, Smt. Pushpa

Devi in the PPO and accordingly issue of Corrigendum PPO to the

applicant.

It is a fit case for adjudication.

Admit.



be filed by learned counsel for the applicant within two weeks,

thereafter.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 18 of 2016

Balram Singh Petitioner


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri Rohit Kumar, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Shri Yogesh Kesarwani, learned counsel for the

respondents.


weeks’ time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any,

may be filed by learned counsel for the applicant within two

weeks, thereafter.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 106 of 2013

Mahabir Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri R. Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Sidharth Dhaon, learned counsel for the respondents.

List has been revised. Neither the applicant nor his counsel is

present nor is there any request to pass over the case.

From perusal of record, it transpires that since past six occasions,

learned counsel for the applicant has not appeared to press this case

and prayer has been made on his behalf to pass over the case. Today

again, no one is present to press the case.

Accordingly, the case is dismissed for non prosecution.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 129 of 2013

Rajendra Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri V.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Sunil Sharma, learned cousnel for the respondents.

On call of the case, Departmental Representative submits that

comments have been received from Department. She prays for and is

granted four weeks time to file an affidavit bringing on record Govt. of

India, Ministry of Defence letter of 2011.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 285 of 2013

Smt. Sunita Devi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri V.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, learned counsel for the respondents.

The applicant present in person submits that he will argue his case

himself and the name of Shri G.K. Pandey, shown as learned counsel

for the applicant be deleted. Registry is directed to delete the name of

Shri G.K. Pandey, as learned counsel for the applicant.

In compliance of order dated 26.07.2017, the applicant has

provided copy of all pending applications to learned counsel for the

respondents.


weeks’ time to file response to all the applications.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 109 of 2014

Mukesh Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri R. Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant and

Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the respondents.

Today, the case was listed for filing of counter affidavit.



be filed by learned counsel for the applicant, thereafter.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 120 of 2014

Jai Ram Yadav & Another Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri V.A. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Namit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.








Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. No. 257 of 2016

Smt. Bittan Devi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri V.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Sidharth Dhaon, learned counsel for the respondents.








Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

O.A. (A) No. 279 of 2013

Manoj Kumar Sharma Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri K.K. Singh Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant

and Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the respondents.








1Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 2

T.A. No. 8 of 2017

Smt. Nandrani Yadav Petitioner


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


14.09.2017



Present: Shri Satendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Shri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the

respondents.


four weeks’ time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if

any, may be filed by learned counsel for the applicant within two

weeks, thereafter.




1

Documents

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL …aftlko.up.nic.in/C2 Daily Order/c2 Order-2017/C2...Shri Manish Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri RKS Chauhan, learned