MOHAMMED ANSARI versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2017] 1 S.C.R. 422 · Decided: 02-02-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
(2017] 1 S.C.R. 422 
MOHAMMED ANSARI 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. I 0131 of2016) 
FEBRUARY 02, 2017 
[illPAK MISRA AND UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.] 
Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 - Administrative Tribunals 
Act, 1985 - Central Civil Services (Control, Classification and 
Appeal) Rules, 1965 - Constitution of India - Art. 226 - Matter 
pertaining to GREF(General Reserve Engineering Force) 
personnel - Jurisdiction of Armed Forces Tribunal(AFT)/Central 
Administrative Tribunal(CAI)lorigina/ jurisdiction of the High Court 
u!Art. 226 - Appellant, member of GREF in Border Roads 
Engine~ring Services - Issue of refusal to grant fina11cial 
upgradation raised by appellant before CAT - Preliminary objection 
raised by the Government as regards thejurisdictio11 of the tribuna/-
Tribunal held that it had the jurisdiction to entertain the matter -
However, the High Court held that CAT had no jurisdiction in the 
matter of the appellants grievance of refusal to grant him financial 
upgradation and, even the Armed Forces Tribunal had no 
;urisdiction - Appropriate remedy was application u!Art. 226 in the 
High Court, or in instituting appropriate suit - On appeal, held: 
Members of GREF belong to the Armed Forces - Armed Forces 
Tribunal shall have jurisdiction to hear appeals arising out of courts 
martial verdicts qua GREF personnel - To this exte/1/ alone the AFT 
shall hove jurisdiction - If the punishment is imposed on GREF 
personnel by way of departmental proceedings held under 
CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965, it can11ot be agitated before AFT - AFT 
shall have no jurisdiction to hear and decide grievances of GREF 
personnel relating to 'service matters' - On facts, in the absence of 
lack of inherent jurisdiction of CAT to deal with the issue of 
upgradation, the said judgment is a nullity- Thus, the view expressed 
by the High Court that it only has the jurisdiction to deal with the 
controversy raised by the appellant, is concurred with - Since the 
grievance agitated by the appellant has not really been addressed 
by any competent forum, appellant granted liberty to approach the 
High Court for redressal of his grievances. 
422 
MOHAMMED ANSARI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
423 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
, 
HELD: 1.1 The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the 
Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 clearly postulate that the Armed 
Forces Tribunal is constituted for the adjudication of complaints 
and disputes regarding service matters and appeals arising out 
of the verdicts of the court-martial of the members of the three 
B B 
services (Army, Navy and Air Force) to provide for quicker and 
less expensive justice to the members of the said Armed Forces 
of the Union. There is no dispute that members of the GREF 
(General Reserve Engineering Force) belong to the Armed 
C 
Forces. GREF, is a departmental construction agency responsible 
to build and maintain roads in the North and North Eastern border 
areas of the country. It is different from other construction 
agencies like CPWD, PWD, etc, inasmuch as, it is a Force raised 
and maintained by the Central Govt. to support the Army in latter's 
operational role at the border areas. The GREF functions under 
the Border Road Development Board, and its Units are modeled 
D 
on the lines of Army Units/Sub Units like Task Force, Road 
Construction Companies, Road Maintenance Platoons etc. [Paras 
20, 24] [435-F-G; 438-E-G] 
1.2 Notification No. SRO 329, Schedule A carves out certain 
exceptions. Certain provisions of the Army Act 1950 i.e. Sections 
10, 11, 13 to 17, 20, 22 to 24 [falling under Chapter IlI of the 
1950 Act dealing with commission, appointment and enrolment] 
Section 43, 44 [falling under Chapter VI-offences' viz. fraudulent 
enrolment and false answers on enrolment respectively and 
clauses (d), (e), (0, (g) and (k) of Sections 71, 74 to 78, clauses 
9(e), () and (j) of Section 80 and clause (a) of Section 84, falling 
F 
under Chapter VII 
- punishment] have been exempted in their 
application to the civilian members of the GREF, for the civilian 
personnel of GREF are not commissioned or enrolled or appointed 
under the 1950 Act and they are not, therefore, members of the 
regular Army' as defined in Section 3(xxi) of the 1950 Act. It is 
G 
for this reason that certain provisions of the 1950 Act as set out 
in Schedule B of the SRO 329 have been modified in their 
application to the members of the GREF. This is fortified by the

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.