Pranab Kumar Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 4605 Cal

   21.
01.8.2023
  S.D.

                                     W.P.A. 16458 of 2023

                                    Pranab Kumar Sharma
                                             Vs.
                                    Union of India & Ors.



                   Mr. Lal Ratan Mondal
                   Ms. Sk. Kiran
                                                 ..For the Petitioner

                   Mr. Partha Ghosh
                   Mr. Sovan Mukherjee          ...For the U.O.I.

                   The petitioner was posted as an Airman in the Indian

            Airforce on November 29, 1982. The petitioner was discharged

            from service on February 2, 1985. The Discharge Certificate

            records that the petitioner has been discharged in accordance

            with Rule 15(j) of the Airforce Rules, 1969, as he is unlikely to

            make an efficient officer. The petitioner has now prayed for

            his retiral benefits.

                   Mr. Mondal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

            petitioner submits that since there was the aforesaid remarks

            in the said Discharge Certificate, the petitioner was unable to

            get a job elsewhere and, therefore, the petitioner's prayer for

            pensionary benefits should be considered sympathetically.
                          2




       Mr. Ghosh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respondents submits that no part of cause of action has arisen

within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. The

same has been recorded by an order passed by a Coordinate

Bench on June 16, 2009 in W.P. No. 28829 (W) of 2008. The

petitioner has again sought to agitate the grievances before

this Hon'ble Court.

Considering the rival submissions of the parties and the

material placed on record, this Court is of the view that the

writ petition is barred by inordinate delay. The writ petitioner

was discharged from service on February 2, 1985. The writ

petitioner has sought to challenge the said order of discharge

by filing a writ petition on July 12, 2023.

Since this Court is of the view that the inordinate delay

on the part of the writ petitioner disentitles him from claiming

a discretionary remedy, this Court ha snot gone into the issue

of territorial jurisdiction. Beneficial reference may be made to

a judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2015) 15 SCC 602

(State of Jammu and Kashmir -vs- R. K. Zalpuri & Ors.).

Also on merit this Court finds that under Section 15(j) of the

Airforce Rules, 1969 an Airman could be discharged from

service during the period of training, if in the opinion of the

commanding officer he was unlikely to make an efficient

Airman. Without such training being completed and the

service of the petitioner being confirmed how he was eligibe

to pray for pensionary benefits has not been placed before this

Court, either by way of materials on record or by arguments.

Accordingly, W.P.A. 16458 of 2023 is dismissed.

Since no affidavits have been directed to be exchanged

in the present writ petition, all the allegations contained in the

present petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the

parties.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order

duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied

for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all the

formalities.

(Lapita Banerji, J.)