IC 78817Y MAJ. MITENDER YADAV vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4543/2025, CM APPL. 21023/2025 & CM APPL. 21024/2025 IC 78817Y MAJ. MITENDER YADAV .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shree Prakash Sinha, Mr. Anand Kumar, Mr. Gurdeep Dass and Mr. Rishabh Kumar, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSPC with Mr. Gokul Sharma, GP Major Anish Muralidhar, Army CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL ORDER (ORAL) % 09.04.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed in apparent oblivion of the parameters of certiorari jurisdiction, which we exercise while dealing with orders passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal1. 2. In order to remind the parties of the scope of certiorari jurisdiction, we may reproduce the following paragraphs from the judgment of the Supreme Court in Syed Yakoob v K.S. 1 “AFT” hereinafter W.P.(C) 4543/2025 Page 1 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:22.04.2025 10:59:44 Radhakrishnan2: "7. The question about the limits of the jurisdiction of High Courts in issuing a writ of certiorari under Article 226 has been frequently considered by this Court and the true legal position in that behalf is no longer in doubt. A writ of certiorari can be issued for correcting errors of jurisdiction committed by inferior courts or tribunals: these are cases where orders are passed by inferior courts or tribunals without jurisdiction, or is in excess of it, or as a result of failure to exercise jurisdiction. A writ can similarly be issued where in exercise of jurisdiction conferred on it, the Court or Tribunal acts illegally or in properly, as for instance, it decides a question without giving an opportunity to be heard, to the party affected by the order, or wh