Daily order sheet, C1, 01 Oct 2026 on 1 October 2026

1. Memo of Appearance filed by Ms. Preeti Mala, Advocate on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. Her name be shown as Counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri KK Misra, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Ms. Preeti Mala, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode. M.A. No. 1113 of 2026

3. There is delay of 03 years, 03 months and 20 days in filing Original Application. Delay condonation application has been filed by the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that first appeal of the applicant is pending with the respondents since 2023 and further submitted that delay caused in filing of Original Application is not deliberate, but on account of reasons given in affidavit filed in support of application.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. We are of the view that ground of delay mentioned in affidavit annexed with delay condonation application is sufficient. Delay condonation application is allowed and delay in filing application is condoned. Delay condonation application stands disposed of. O.A. No. 956 of 2026

7. This Original Application has been filed for grant of disability pension.

8. Matter needs adjudication.

9. Admit.

10. Learned counsel for the respondents is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder Affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

11. (Maj.Gen. Sanjay Singh) (Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta) Member (A) Member (J) SB

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No. 1 (Suppl. No. 4) OA No. 958 of 2026 with MA No. 1154 of 2026

Sub Raj Bahadur Singh (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, Advocate Shri Ravi Prakash Tripathi, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Bipin Kumar Singh, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. Memo of Appearance filed by Shri Bipin Kumar Singh, Advocate on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be shown as Counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Bipin Kumar Singh, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present. M.A. No. 1154 of 2026

3. There is delay of 09 months and 19 days in filing Original Application. Delay condonation application has been filed by the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that delay caused in filing of Original Application is not deliberate, but on account of reasons given in affidavit filed in support of application.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. We are of the view that ground of delay mentioned in affidavit annexed with delay condonation application is sufficient. Delay condonation application is allowed and delay in filing application is condoned. Delay condonation application stands disposed of. O.A. No. 958 of 2026

7. This Original Application has been filed for grant of pensionary benefits.

8. Matter needs adjudication.

9. Admit.

10. Learned counsel for the respondents is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder Affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

11. SB

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No. 1 (Suppl. No. 5)

OA No. 960 of 2026 with MA No. 1157 of 2026

Nk (AA) Suryakanta Moharana

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Virat Anand Singh, Advocate Shri Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms. Pallavi Borgohain, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Yogesh Kesarwani, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. Memo of Appearance filed by Shri Yogesh Kesarwani, Advocate on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be shown as Counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Virat Anand Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present but Shri Yogesh Kesarwani, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is not present. However, Legal Representative is present for the respondents.

3. Legal Representative raised objection against the maintainability of this Original Application.

4. As prayed, four weeks time is granted to the respondents to seek instruction and file objection on maintainability of the Original Application.

5. SB

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No. 1 (Suppl. No. 6)

Ex-A. No. 305 of 2026 Inre: OA No. 736 of 2024

Ex Nk Om Prakash

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Ashok Kumar, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. Memo of Appearance filed by Shri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, Advocate on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be shown as Counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Ashok Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present through virtual mode.

3. This is fresh execution application filed by the applicant for implementation of order dated 27.01.2026 passed in OA No. 736 of 2024.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted four weeks time to seek instruction and file compliance affidavit.

5. SB

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No. 1 (Suppl. No. 8)

DY. No. 1712 of 2026

MCEA ® II Akhilesh Kumar (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Sarvesh Kumar Verma, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Arun Kumar Sahu, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Sarvesh Kumar Verma, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Arun Kumar Sahu, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present.

2. In this case, respondents raised objection and submitted that the applicant is resident of Bihar and on the basis of rent agreement, the applicant is shown the resident within the territorial jurisdiction of this Tribunal and on that date, it was submitted that without verification of rent agreement, there is no meaning of territorial jurisdiction.

3. In pursuance to the objection of the learned counsel for the respondents, learned counsel for the applicant has filed tenant’s verification report from police and as per verification report, the applicant is resident as per rent agreement filed by the applicant, and thus, the applicant is resident within the territorial jurisdiction of this Bench.

4. Thus, defect raised by the Registry is rectified and therefore, Registry is directed to allot Original Application number to the case.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. This Original Application has been filed for grant of disability pension.

7. Matter needs adjudication.

8. Admit.

9. Learned counsel for the respondents is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder Affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

10. (Maj. Gen. Sanjay Singh) (Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta) Member (A) Member (J) SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 494 of 2023 Inre: OA No. 365 of 2023 Ex Hav Pawar Sandeep Shivaji

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri KKS Bisht, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Ms. Deepti Prasad Bajpai, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri KKS Bisht, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Ms. Deepti Prasad Bajpai, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that corrigendum PPO has been issued in compliance of the order of this Tribunal.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant conceded the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents and submitted that compliance has been done.

5. Since, order has been complied with, this Execution Application is disposed of in full satisfaction.

SB

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No. 1 (Sl. No.2)

Ex-A. No. 502 of 2023 Inre: OA No. 298 of 2022 Ex CPO WTR Brij Kishore Singh

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Raj Kumar Mishra, Advocate Shri AK Chaudhary, Advocate Ms. Upasna Mishra, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Amit Jaiswal, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Raj Kumar Mishra, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Shri Amit Jaiswal, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode. Shri Raj Kumar Singh, Accounts Officer, PCDA (P) Prayagraj is also present before the court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that corrigendum PPO has been issued in compliance of the order of this Tribunal and Rs. 5,70, 825/- have been paid to the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant conceded the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents and submitted that compliance has been done.

5. Since, order has been complied with, this Execution Application is disposed of in full satisfaction.

6. Since order has been complied with, further presence of DPA (Navy) is hereby exempted.

SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 50 of 2024 Inre: OA No. 198 of 2023

Ex HFO Shail Kumar Singh

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Ajit Ranjan, Advocate Shri Anushri Verma, Advocate Shri Pradeep Kumar, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Kaushik Chatterjee, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Ajit Ranjan, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Shri Kaushik Chatterjee, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode.

2. In compliance of the order dated 27.04.2026, responsible officer from DAV (Legal) is not present virtually. In the circumstances, the responsible officer is hereby directed to appear before the Bench physically on the next date of listing.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that after assailing the order of this Tribunal, Writ Petition No. 735/2026 was filed which has been dismissed on 04.08.2026.

4. The Hon’ble Apex Court has also settled the matter. In the circumstances there is no other option but to comply the order of this bench in letter and spirit.

5. On the next date of listing, if compliance is done by the respondents, then there is no need to appear responsible officer physically.

6.

7. Copy of the order be given to the learned counsel for the respondents/Legal Representative for necessary compliance.

SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 150 of 2024 Inre: OA No. 249 of 2023

Ex JWO Sarvesh Kumar Bajpai

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Bipin Kumar Singh, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Vinay Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is not present. Shri Bipin Kumar Singh, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that although Writ Petition has been filed assailing the order of this Tribunal before the Hon’ble High Court but it is pending before the Hon’ble High Court.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in compliance of the order dated 27.04.2026, undertaking affidavit has not been received by the respondents from the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant is hereby directed to submit undertaking affidavit to the respondents within four weeks for provisional compliance of the order.

5. SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 455 of 2024 Inre: OA No. 167 of 2023

Col Rajiv Bhardwaj(Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Anurag Mishra, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Vinay Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Anurag Mishra, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Compliance affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that earlier Writ Petition has been filed assailing the order of this Tribunal before the Hon’ble High Court which has been dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court on 14.09.2026.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents seeks and is granted four weeks further time to file compliance affidavit.

6. SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 458 of 2024 Inre: OA No. 414 of 2023

Ex L/NK Amarnath Singh

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Rahul Pal, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Anurag Mishra, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Rahul Pal, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Anurag Mishra, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Compliance affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that although Writ Petition has been filed assailing the order of this Tribunal before the Hon’ble High Court but there is no stay order.

5. In these circumstances, respondents are directed to make compliance of the order provisionally subject to final outcome of the Writ Petition filed before the Hon’ble High Court after obtaining undertaking on affidavit from the applicant to effect that in case any adverse order is passed against him, he would return all the amount, if any, and comply with the order of the Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition.

6. As prayed by the learned counsel for the respondents four weeks further time is granted to comply the order provisionally and file provisional compliance affidavit.

7. Respondents are hereby directed to deposit remaining cost in the Registry till next date of listing.

8.

9. Copy of order be provided to the respondents/Legal Cell for compliance of the order.

SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 460 of 2024 Inre: OA No. 990 of 2023 Ex Sgt Arun Kumar

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Alok Kumar Mishra, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Vinay Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is not present. Shri Alok Kumar Mishra, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present before the court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Status report has already been filed by the learned counsel for the respondents which is taken on record.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that Writ Petition has been filed assailing the order of this Tribunal before the Hon’ble High Court but it is pending before the Hon’ble High Court.

5. As per status report, Writ Petition No. 6160/2026 is pending before the Hon’ble High Court and impugned order dated 11.04.2026 passed in connected Writ Petition is remained stayed.

6. Since, operative stay order exists, list this case on 21.04.2027.

SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 467 of 2024 Inre : OA No. 901 of 2023

Ex Nb Sub Santosh Kumar Dixit

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Ms. Amrita Chakraborty, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Vinay Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is not present. Ms. Amrita Chakraborty, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode.

2. Compliance affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents seeks some more time to comply the order and file compliance affidavit. As prayed, four weeks further time is granted to the respondents to file compliance affidavit.

4. SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 469 of 2024 Inre: OA No. 1488 of 2023

Ex Hav Anil Kumar Yadav

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Anurag Mishra, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. Shri Shantanu Kumar Chaturvedi has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the applicant which is taken on record. Registry is directed to show his name as counsel for the applicant in future cause list.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Shantanu Kumar Chaturvedi, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Anurag Mishra, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present.

3. Compliance affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents seeks some more time to comply the order and file compliance affidavit. As prayed, four weeks further time is granted to the respondents, as last opportunity, to file compliance affidavit, failing which responsible officer shall be present before the Bench through virtual mode on the next date fixed to explain the reason for non compliance of the order of this Tribunal. .

5.

6. Copy of the order be provided to learned counsel for the respondents/Legal Representative for necessary compliance.

SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 41 of 2025 Inre: OA No. 1253 of 2023

Brig Tapan Kumar Sahoo (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Ajai Kumar Pandey, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Ms. Prerna Singh, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing none appeared for the applicant. Ms. Prerna Singh, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Compliance affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

4. Legal Representative submitted that in compliance of the order dated 05.07 2024, corrigendum PPO has been issued on 11.05.2026 and payment of Rs. 33,68,675/- has been made to the applicant.

5. SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 144 of 2026 Inre: OA No. 434 of 2024

Ex Sub Raja EK

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri KP Datta, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Ms. Amrita Chakraborty, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri KP Datta, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Ms. Amrita Chakraborty, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Compliance affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents seeks some more time to comply the order. As prayed, four weeks further time is granted to the respondents to file compliance affidavit.

5. SB

ORDER SHEET

Ex-A. No. 145 of 2026 Inre: OA No. 76 of 2026 Ex Hav Bhavsar Mahesha Kumar Bhagawan

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Ashok Singh, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri SN Pandey, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Ashok Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri SN Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present through virtual mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Compliance affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

4. By the order dated, 23.05.2026, it was directed to the respondents to decide the Statutory complaint dated 07.04.2025 of the applicant within a period of three months and now more than four months have already passed but he compliance has not been made. So, in the circumstance, there is no other option but to direct the responsible officer to appear before the court to explain the reasons for non compliance. Therefore, representative of PS-4 is hereby directed to appear before the court through virtual mode to explain the reason for non compliance of the order of this Tribunal.

5.

6. Copy of the order be provided to the learned counsel for the respondents/Legal Representative for necessary compliance.

7. If compliance is done by the next date fixed, then there is no need to appear responsible officer before this Bench.

SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 211 of 2025

Ex NK Murari Lal

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents :Ms. Anju Singh, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Vinay Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is not present. Ms. Anju Singh, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode.

2. Rejoinder affidavit has not been filed by the applicant.

3. As prayed, four weeks further time, as last opportunity, is granted to the learned counsel for the applicant to file rejoinder affidavit.

4. SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 607 of 2025

Ex Sub B Kalaiselvan

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri R Chandra, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Ms. Amrita Chakraborty, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri R Chandra, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Ms. Amrita Chakraborty, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode.

2. Rejoinder affidavit has not been filed by the applicant.

3. Today, Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he is not inclined to file rejoinder affidavit.

4. List for physical final hearing on 17.02.2027.

SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 822 of 2025

WO Ganesh Shankar Mishra (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, Advocate

Shri Mahendra Kumar Singh, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri RKS Chauhan, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Shri RKS Chauhan, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode.

2. Counter affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that counter affidavit is under preparation and it will be filed in the Registry within a week.

4. As prayed, a week further time is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit after providing copy to the learned counsel for the applicant.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant may file rejoinder affidavit within two weeks.

6. SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 970 of 2025

Ex Hav Kshetrimayum Bishwanath

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate Shri Sunil Kumar Tripathi, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Alok Kumar Mishra, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, none appeared for the applicant. Shri Alok Kumar Mishra, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present before the court.

2. Rejoinder affidavit has not been filed by the applicant.

3. Four weeks further time, as last opportunity, is granted to the learned counsel for the applicant to file rejoinder affidavit.

4. SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 1041 of 2025

Col Deshraj Mishra (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Yashpal Singh, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Sunil Sharma, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri R Chandra holding brief of Shri Yashpal Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court. Shri Sunil Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is not present, however, legal representative is present.

2. Counter affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

3. Legal Representative submitted that parawise comments have been forwarded to the learned counsel for the respondents on 25.02.2026. About 8 months have already passed but the counter affidavit has not been filed by the learned counsel for the respondents.

4. As prayed, four weeks further time, as last opportunity, is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit.

5. SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 1117 of 2025 Nb Sub Kamlesh Kumar Dandhare (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Manoj Kumar Awasthi, Advocate Shri Anshuman Srivastava, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Anurag Mishra, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Anuj Sharma, Advocate holding brief of Shri Manoj Kumar Awasthi, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Anurag Mishra, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present.

2. Counter affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that counter affidavit is under preparation and seeks further time to file counter affidavit.

4. As prayed, four weeks further time is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit.

5. SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 1118 of 2025

Col (Retd) Vijay Kumar Tiwari

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Virat Anand Singh, Advocate Shri Narendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Bipin Kumar Singh, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Virat Anand Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Bipin Kumar Singh, Ld. Counsel for the respondents are present.

2. This case was admitted on 08.01.2026 and since then, 10 months have passed but counter affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that parawise comments are still awaited from ADG MP and PCDA. So, in the circumstances, OIC, Officers Record Office is directed to be present before this Bench through virtual mode on next date of listing to explain the reasons for not sending comments to file counter affidavit.

4. As prayed, four weeks further time, as last opportunity, is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit.

5.

6. If parawise comments are received by the next date fixed, then further presence of the officer is not required.

SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 1121 of 2025

Ex Hav Ajeet Singh

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Manoj Kumar Awasthi, Advocate Shri Anshuman Srivastava, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Gyan Singh, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri Manoj Kumar Awasthi, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Shri Gyan Singh, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present through virtual mode.

2. Counter affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that counter affidavit is under preparation and seeks further time to file counter affidavit.

4. As prayed, four weeks further time is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit.

5. SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 427 of 2026

MWO (Hony. Fit Lt) Krishan Kumar Singh (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Girish Chandra Tripathi, Advocate Shri Indra Mani Tripathi, Advocate Shri Sunil Kumar Mishra, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing none appeared on behalf of the applicant. Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is also not present.

2. Counter affidavit has not been filed by the respondents.

3. Legal Representative submitted that parawise comments have been handed over to the learned counsel for the respondents in August 2026.

4. As prayed, four weeks further time is granted to the respondents to file counter affidavit.

5. SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 890 of 2022

Ex L/NK Ramakant Prasad

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Ved Prakash, Advocate Shri Devendra Kumar, Advocate Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Chet Narayan Singh, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the applicant Shri Chet Narayan Singh, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present.

2. On earlier date, i.e. 19.05.2026, learned counsel for the applicant was not present. Today also no one is present on behalf of the applicant.

3. So, in the circumstances there is no other option but to dismiss the application for want of prosecution.

4. Accordingly, Original Application is dismissed for want of prosecution.

SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 108 of 2024

Ex Sub Sendhur Pandian A

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri KK Misra, Advocate

Versus Chief of Army Staff & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Arun Kumar Sahu, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing Shri KK Misra, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is not present. Shri Arun Kumar Sahu, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present.

2. In the interest of justice, one more opportunity of four weeks is granted to the learned counsel for the applicant to argue the case on the next date fixed.

3. List for hearing on 15.02.2027.

SB

ORDER SHEET

OA No. 231 of 2025

Sgt Sanat Kumar Tripathi (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Girish Chandra Tripathi, Advocate Shri Sunil Kumar Mishra, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Arvind Kumar Pandey, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, none appeared for the applicant. Shri Arvind Kumar Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the respondents is present.

2. On the next date of listing, if the learned counsel for the applicant fails to argue the case it will be dismissed as infructuous.

3. SB