SEP. SATGUR SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

SEP. SATGUR SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

The requirement under Para 5(a) of the Army Instructions dated 28.12.1988 is satisfied where the personnel are issued a show-cause notice, their explanation is considered, and an order is passed thereon. There is no requirement for a regular departmental enquiry or court of inquiry. Since the appellant was given an opportunity to put up his defence and failed to provide any substantive explanation for his misconduct, the order of discharge is justified.

Parties
Appellant: Sep. Satgur Singh; Respondents: Union of India & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Armed Forces Tribunal (chandigarh Regional Bench) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Discharge From Service, Army Personnel Disciplinary Procedure, Preliminary Enquiry, Army Instructions Para 5(a)
Service Law Discharge From Service Army Personnel Disciplinary Procedure Preliminary Enquiry Army Instructions Para 5(a)

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sep. Satgur Singh

Appellant

Union of India & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Armed Forces Tribunal (chandigarh Regional Bench) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether discharge from service based on seven red ink entries without regular enquiry as per Para 5(a) of Army Instructions dated 28.12.1988 is sustainable

Ratio Decidendi

The requirement under Para 5(a) of the Army Instructions dated 28.12.1988 is satisfied where the personnel are issued a show-cause notice, their explanation is considered, and an order is passed thereon. There is no requirement for a regular departmental enquiry or court of inquiry. Since the appellant was given an opportunity to put up his defence and failed to provide any substantive explanation for his misconduct, the order of discharge is justified.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of discharge upheld