2,591 orders by AFT’s UT Bench yet to be implemented; highest in country

Vijay Mohan

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, August 10

Among the 5,802 orders of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) pending for execution, the tribunal’s Chandigarh Bench has the highest number of such cases among its 11 benches in the country.

The pendency may reduce after the tribunal’s larger bench recently ruled that the AFT possesses the powers of contempt if there is wilful non-compliance by respondents, giving it much-needed teeth to get orders implemented.

According to available data, 2,591 applications are pending for execution before the Chandigarh Bench, followed by 1,084 in the Principal Bench at New Delhi and 866 in the Lucknow Bench. The lowest pendency is of eight applications in the Guwahati Bench and nine in the Kolkata Bench.

Tribunal not toothless: Judgment

• Unlike the Supreme Court and High Courts, the AFT does not possess powers to initiate action for contempt.
• However, a landmark judgment has interpreted Section 29 of the AFT Act and Rule 25 of the AFT Rules to hold that the legislature did not intend to keep the tribunal toothless.

The high pendency was due to the Ministry of Defence (MoD) ignoring the judgements and orders of the AFT. The reason was that the AFT, unlike the Supreme Court and the High Courts, did not possess the powers of initiating action for contempt, making it powerless.

Sources said the AFT’s judgement was being examined by the MoD for further action. The issue of non-compliance of orders had also been raised by various AFT bar associations with the Principal Bench as well as the MoD.

The larger bench was constituted in 2014 when a two-member bench at Delhi had expressed apprehensions in following a judgment of the Kerala High Court, which had directed the Kochi Bench to invoke powers of contempt in case of non-compliance by defence authorities.

The landmark judgment, running into more than 500 pages with appendices and perhaps the longest in the tribunal’s history, has interpreted Section 29 of the AFT Act and Rule 25 of the AFT Rules to hold that the legislature did not intend to keep the AFT toothless.

The Bench, comprising Justice Anu Malhotra, Lt Gen CP Mohanty and Rear Admiral Dhiren Vig, observed that more than 5,000 of the Tribunal’s orders were lying unimplemented, without any stay from the High Court or the Supreme Court.

The bench matter referred to the larger bench included cases filed by Lt Col Mukul Dev in 2014 at the Kolkata Bench and suo moto contempt proceedings initiated by the Chandigarh Bench.

Marathon hearings were held in the case in April and May, with Additional Solicitor General Vikramjit Banerjee and Anil Gautam representing the government and Rajiv Manglik representing the litigants.

The court had appointed lawyers Rajshekhar Rao and Navdeep Singh from the Delhi and the Punjab and Haryana High Courts, respectively, to assist the larger bench as amici curiae.

In the past, the Punjab and Haryana Court has come down heavily upon the MoD for the non-implementation of AFT orders. The Supreme Court and various High Courts have also passed strong observations against the MoD for filing frivolous appeals against disabled personnel and other pensioners in settled matters. The approach of the MoD has also drawn flak from the government’s own panels and committees.