- (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Ashok Nigam, Additional Solicitor General of India assisted by Shri I.H.Farooqui, Assistant Solicitor General of India.
(2.) WRIT Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 19.5.2010 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow in Transfer Application No. 14 of 2010 as contained in Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is substantively illegal and has been passed on unfounded facts. A preliminary objection has been raised by Dr. Ashok Nigam, learned Additional Solicitor General that the writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has got alternative appellate remedy before the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Section 30 of the Arms Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
(3.) PETITIONER's counsel relied upon the cases in Minerva Mills Ltd. and others v. Union of India and others, (1980) 3 SCC 625; Union of India and others v. Pratibha Bonnerjea and another, (1995) 6 SCC 765; S.P Sampath Kumar v. Union of India and others, (1987) 1 SCC 124; Delhi Judicial Service Association v. State of Gujarat and others, (1991) 4 SCC 40; M.B. Majumdar v. Union of India, (1990) 4 SCC 501 and Kihoto Hollohan v. Z. Achillhu and others, 1992 Supp. (2) SCC 651. It is submitted that the right of the petitioner to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India co-relate to basic structure of the Indian Constitution and litigant cannot be prevented to approach this Court because of the availability of statutory and alternative remedy. At the very threshold, we wish to observe that the submission made by the petitioner's counsel are not disputed question of law. Power conferred to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is wide enough to interfere with each and every order passed by the Tribunal or the authority but it depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. In case statute provides some alternative remedy in the form of appeal or revision, then ordinarily such remedy should not be bypassed.;