✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 23 Apr 2010

K.V.V.Satyanarayana v. The Chief of the Naval Staff, (For Director, Personnel Services), Naval Headquarters

Writ Petition No. 21278 of 2001SANJAY KUMAR

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.21278 OF 2001 ORDER: This case arises out of a service matter as defined under Section 3(o) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 (for brevity, ‘the Act of 2007’). In view of the constitution of the Armed Forces Tribunal at Chennai under Section 4 of the Act of 2007, Section 34 thereof comes into play. Section 34 speaks of transfer to such Tribunal of all pending cases before any Court, including a High Court, immediately before the date of establishment of the Tribunal. Though Section 14 of the Act of 2007 specifically excludes from the jurisdiction of the said Tribunal, the jurisdiction, powers and authority exercisable by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in relation to all service matters, pending writ petitions which deal with various aspects of service conditions of the armed forces would normally be dealt with by the Tribunal constituted under Section 4 of the Act of 2007. The issue of maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in a service matter which comes within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal would have to be decided on a case to case basis. No objection is raised with regard to the transfer of this writ petition to the Armed Forces Tribunal under Section 34 of the Act of 2007. Accordingly, this writ petition shall stand withdrawn from this Court and be transferred to the Armed Forces Tribunal at Chennai for adjudication. The Registry is directed to transmit the record pertaining to this writ petition to the said Tribunal forthwith. 23RD APRIL, 2010. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. VGSR/PGS

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 — s. 3(o); Constitution of India — art. 226.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 23 Apr 2010. The bench was SANJAY KUMAR.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 21278 of 2001). ← Search more judgments