Army Rules, 1954

Supreme Court Orders Disability Pension and Compensation for Wrongfully Discharged Army Personnel Diagnosed with AIDS: Satyanand Singh vs. Union of India (2024) INSC 236 (20 March 2024)

/ Army Rules, 1954, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 13, Disability Pension, Discharge from Service, Medical Negligence, Service Law

Supreme Court Orders Disability Pension and Compensation for Wrongfully Discharged Army Personnel Diagnosed with AIDS: Satyanand Singh vs. Union of India (2024) INSC 236 (20 March 2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an army personnel, wrongly diagnosed with AIDS and consequently discharged, is entitled to disability pension and compensation. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Satyanand Singh […]

Supreme Court Orders Disability Pension and Compensation for Wrongfully Discharged Army Personnel Diagnosed with AIDS: Satyanand Singh vs. Union of India (2024) INSC 236 (20 March 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Disability Pension to Soldier Discharged on Administrative Grounds: Union of India vs. Ex. Sep. R. Munusamy (2022)

/ Armed Forces Law, Army Rules, 1954, Disability Pension, Discharge, Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Pension Law, Service Law, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Denies Disability Pension to Soldier Discharged on Administrative Grounds: Union of India vs. Ex. Sep. R. Munusamy (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a soldier discharged on administrative grounds, not medical grounds, is entitled to disability pension. CASE TYPE: Armed Forces Pension Law Case Name: Union of India & Ors. vs. Ex. Sep. R. Munusamy

Supreme Court Denies Disability Pension to Soldier Discharged on Administrative Grounds: Union of India vs. Ex. Sep. R. Munusamy (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the application of Rule 180 of Army Rules in Court Martial Proceedings: Union of India vs. Virendra Kumar (2020)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 with Section 16, Army Rules, 1954, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 180, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 22, Court of Inquiry, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao

Supreme Court clarifies the application of Rule 180 of Army Rules in Court Martial Proceedings: Union of India vs. Virendra Kumar (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether non-compliance of Rule 180 of the Army Rules, 1954 during a Court of Inquiry vitiates the subsequent Court Martial proceedings. CASE TYPE: Armed Forces Law Case Name: Union of India

Supreme Court clarifies the application of Rule 180 of Army Rules in Court Martial Proceedings: Union of India vs. Virendra Kumar (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Inquiry in Disciplinary Case Against Brigadier L.I. Singh: Service Law (17 December 2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Army Act, Army Act with Section 123, Army Rules, 1954, Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Natural Justice, Service Law

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Inquiry in Disciplinary Case Against Brigadier L.I. Singh Date of the Judgment: 17 December 2019 Citation: Not Available Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., Ajay Rastogi, J. Can disciplinary proceedings against a retired army officer be continued based on a flawed initial inquiry? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Inquiry in Disciplinary Case Against Brigadier L.I. Singh: Service Law (17 December 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Armed Forces Tribunal Decision: Dismissal of Sepoy Pravat Kumar Behuria Set Aside in Army Assault Case (06 November 2019)

/ Army Act, 1950, Army Act, 1950 with Rule 23(2), Army Rules, 1954, Hemant Gupta, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 326, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Upholds Armed Forces Tribunal Decision in Sepoy Pravat Kumar Behuria Case Date of the Judgment: 06 November 2019 Citation: Criminal Appeal No. 1627 of 2019 (@ Diary No. 1052 of 2018) Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J. and Hemant Gupta, J. Can a court martial’s decision be overturned if proper procedure isn’t followed? The

Supreme Court Upholds Armed Forces Tribunal Decision: Dismissal of Sepoy Pravat Kumar Behuria Set Aside in Army Assault Case (06 November 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns discharge based on red ink entries in Army: Narain Singh vs. Union of India (2019)

/ Army Rules, 1954, Arun Mishra, B. R. Gavai, Discharge from Service, Judges, M. R. Shah, Pensionable Service, Rule 13(3)(III)(v), Army Rules, 1954, Service Law

Supreme Court overturns discharge based on red ink entries in Army: Narain Singh vs. Union of India (2019) Date of the Judgment: September 20, 2019 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Arun Mishra J., M. R. Shah J., and B. R. Gavai J. Can a soldier be discharged from service solely based on a few

Supreme Court overturns discharge based on red ink entries in Army: Narain Singh vs. Union of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Army Personnel for False Documents: Ex. Sepoy Surendra Singh Yadav vs. Chief Record Officer (2019)

/ Army Act, 1950, Army Act, 1950 with Section 44, Army Rules, 1954, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 13, Discharge from Service, Hemant Gupta, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Summary Court Martial

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Army Personnel for False Documents: Ex. Sepoy Surendra Singh Yadav vs. Chief Record Officer (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an army personnel can be discharged from service for submitting a false educational certificate, even after being exonerated in a Summary Court Martial for the same offense. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Army Personnel for False Documents: Ex. Sepoy Surendra Singh Yadav vs. Chief Record Officer (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies medical discharge procedure for army personnel: Ram Khilawan vs. Union of India (2019)

/ Army Rules, 1954, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 13, Hemant Gupta, Invalidating Medical Board, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Low Medical Category, Medical Discharge, Pension Benefits, Service Law

Supreme Court Clarifies Medical Discharge Procedures in Army Service: Ram Khilawan vs. Union of India (2019) Date of the Judgment: September 2, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 861 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., Hemant Gupta, J. Can an army personnel be discharged from service due to medical reasons without a proper evaluation by an Invalidating Medical

Supreme Court clarifies medical discharge procedure for army personnel: Ram Khilawan vs. Union of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court mandates Invalidating Medical Board for discharge on medical grounds: Smt. Sulekha Rani vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 690 (16 July 2019)

/ Armed Forces Tribunal, Army Rules, 1954, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 13, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 14, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee, Judges

Supreme Court Rules Invalidating Medical Board Mandatory for Discharge on Medical Grounds Date of the Judgment: 16 July 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 690 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Indira Banerjee, J. Can a member of the armed forces be discharged from service on medical grounds without an Invalidating Medical Board? The Supreme Court

Supreme Court mandates Invalidating Medical Board for discharge on medical grounds: Smt. Sulekha Rani vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 690 (16 July 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Legal Assistance in Summary Court Martial: Jaswant Singh vs. Union of India (2018)

/ Army Rules, 1954, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 129, Constitutional Law, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Judges, M.R. Shah, Natural Justice, Summary Court Martial

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Legal Assistance in Summary Court Martial: Jaswant Singh vs. Union of India (2018) Date of the Judgment: 10 December 2018 Citation: 2018 INSC 1088 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J., M.R. Shah, J. Can a soldier be denied legal representation during a Summary Court Martial? The Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Legal Assistance in Summary Court Martial: Jaswant Singh vs. Union of India (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes ‘Severe Displeasure’ penalty and orders promotion for Army Officer: Union of India vs. Col. A.D. Nargolkar (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Armed Forces Tribunal, Ashok Bhushan, Court of Inquiry, Judges, Military Law, Military Law with Army Rule 180, Natural Justice, Procedural Fairness, Service Law

Supreme Court quashes ‘Severe Displeasure’ penalty and orders promotion for Army Officer: Union of India vs. Col. A.D. Nargolkar (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Court of Inquiry (COI) adhered to the principles of natural justice and Army Rule 180 while imposing a ‘Severe Displeasure (Recordable)’ penalty on an Army Officer. CASE TYPE: Armed Forces Tribunal

Supreme Court quashes ‘Severe Displeasure’ penalty and orders promotion for Army Officer: Union of India vs. Col. A.D. Nargolkar (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Fraudulent Enrolment in Army: Ex Sig. Man Kanhaiya Kumar vs. Union of India (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Army Act, 1950, Army Act, 1950 with Section 122, Army Act, 1950 with Section 20, Army Rules, 1954, Ashok Bhushan, Judges

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Fraudulent Enrolment in Army: Ex Sig. Man Kanhaiya Kumar vs. Union of India (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether dismissal under Section 20(3) of the Army Act, 1950 is valid when a specific provision under Section 122(4) of the same Act exists for fraudulent enrolment. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Ex

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Fraudulent Enrolment in Army: Ex Sig. Man Kanhaiya Kumar vs. Union of India (2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top