IC-76585M Major Nishant Kaushik (Petitioner) Vs. Union of India and Others (Respondents)
(W.P.14385/2022 or 2023 SCC OnLine Del 3205)
(2JB, SURESH KUMAR KAIT AND SAURABH BANERJEE, JJ.,)
Facts: Vide this review petition, the review petitioner is seeking review of judgment and order dated 11.10.2022 passed by this Court in W.P. (C) No. 14385/2022, whereby the writ petition filed by review petitioner was dismissed on the ground that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the said petition and the same was disposed of by giving liberty to petitioner to move an appropriate application under Section 32 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007. Consequently, the review petitioner preferred an S.L.P.(C) 84/2023 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, however, the same was dismissed as withdrawn without seeking any liberty. Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has passed judgment in the case of Union of India v. Parashotam Dass whereby the Delhi High Court has issued notices in various writ petitions which are pending for adjudication.
Issue: Whether after the SLP before Hon’ble Supreme Court was dismissed, a Review Petition seeking review of order dated 11.10.2022 before this Court is maintainable?
Arguments on behalf of counsel for petitioner: Mr. Shree Prakash Sinha, Mr. Anand Kumar, Mr. Rakesh Mishra and Mr. Akshit Anand, Advocates
Learned counsel submits that though review petition is not maintainable before this Court, however, petitioner may raise issue before the Learned Court Martial Court and the said Court may consider the same on merits, as per law. Learned counsel has further disputed the submission of learned counsel for respondents by submitting that learned Court Martial Court may get influenced by the order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition, this Court in Writ Petition and learned AFT.
Arguments on behalf of counsel for respondents: Mr. Sushil Kumar Pandey, Advocate with Major Partho Katyayan
Learned counsels opposed the review petition.
Held: The court, without expressing any opinion on the maintainability of present review petition, disposed of the same while giving liberty to the review petitioner to raise issue before the learned Court Martial Court, while also directing the learned Court Martial Court to not get influenced by the observations made in order passed by learned AFT, judgment passed by the High Court and order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. The court observed that, “Since the case of petitioner has not been decided on merits either by Hon’ble Supreme Court or by this Court, therefore, in view of para 33 of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Parashotam Dass, a litigant has a right to two reviews whereas in the present case, the order is passed by learned AFT and no further order has been passed on merits either by this Court or by Hon’ble Supreme Court.”
