EX-NAIK AJAY KUMAR vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~69 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 12185/2025, CM APPL. 49678/2025 EX-NAIK AJAY KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhijit Anand, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Mayank Sharma, Sr. PC with Mr. Kamaldeep, GP for UOI with Major Anish Murlidhar and Captain Carolin Johnson (Army) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA ORDER (ORAL) % 13.08.2025 C.HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. The order impugned in this writ petition reads thus: “MA 2781/2024 This is an application filed seeking early hearing of OA 2599/2023. In out considered view, no case is made out for out of turn hearing. 2. MA stands dismissed.” 2. We are flabbergasted that such an order has been made subject matter of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. It is not for this Court to decide the sequence of hearings by the Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 12185/2025 Digitally Signed By:AJIT Page 1 of 2 KUMAR Signing Date:14.08.2025 18:25:05 Armed Forces Tribunal1 of the cases pending before it. We are conscious of the fact that the AFT is dealing with a large volume of work and are sanguine that the AFT is duly prioritising matters as per its roster and the urgency of the cause involved. 4. There is no question of this Court interfering with the order passed by the AFT, which has not deemed it appropriate to grant early hearing to the petitioner. 5. The petitioner can only expect consideration of his case as per its seniority, and the urgency of the cause, keeping in view the number of matters pending before the AFT. The petitioner cannot seek any preferential treatment over other litigants whose cases may be of greater seniority. 6. In any event, the AFT alone can take a view in that regard. It has done so, a