SANJAY RAMAN SINHA (SRS): It is almost mid-term after your re-appointment as the chairman of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) for four years in 2023. How different has been this term, and what new initiatives have been taken so far?
JUSTICE RAJENDRA MENON (JRM): I assumed charge as chairperson of the AFT on November 6, 2019. After completing my first term in 2023, my second term commenced on November 7, 2024. My tenure at the AFT has been both enriching and a significant learning experience. The principles of law applicable to the armed forces differ from those governing civil litigation, particularly in light of Article 33 of the Constitution, which imposes unique constraints considering the discipline, national security and operational requirements of the armed forces.
Over time, I have gained a deep understanding of the defence establishment’s functioning and have ensured the effective implementation of rules and regulations in line with the precedents set by the Supreme Court, High Courts and various AFT benches. I have undertaken several key initiatives during my tenure, including:
- Establishing a new Circuit Bench at Goa.
- Introducing mediation within the armed forces in collaboration with the Institute of Military Law.
- Conducting 40-hour mediation training for approximately 120 officers from the Army, Navy and Air Force at the Indian Military Institute in New Delhi.
- Promoting mediation as a regular mechanism, particularly for resolving family and matrimonial disputes brought before the Tribunal.
Additionally, I have implemented hybrid hearings, enabling virtual case proceedings. This has ensured continuity even in the absence of Judicial or Administrative Members at Regional Benches. From 2:15 pm onwards, urgent matters from these Benches are also addressed by me and my colleagues at the Principal Bench, enhancing efficiency despite vacancies.
I have also initiated the publication of a Law Journal, organized legal awareness camps and conferences for advocates and veterans in collaboration with the Legal Services Authority and proposed legal aid assistance for litigants at the Principal Bench in New Delhi. Discussions and formalities for this initiative are being finalized in coordination with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority.
These efforts are aimed at strengthening the Tribunal’s effectiveness and ensuring justice is accessible to all stakeholders within the armed forces.
SRS: What has been the pendency and case disposal records? Are there any bottlenecks?
JRM: The disposal rate of cases in the AFT has been commendable. While the overall pendency has increased in recent years, this is primarily due to greater awareness among veterans and serving personnel, leading to a higher number of filings. Despite this, cases related to disability pensions, pay fixation and similar matters are being resolved swiftly. The total pendency as on date is 26,253.
The highest pendency is observed at the Principal Bench in New Delhi and the Regional Benches in Chandigarh, Lucknow and Jaipur. In contrast, the other seven Regional Benches have relatively lower case backlogs. While there are no major bottlenecks, the primary challenge remains the shortage of Judicial and Administrative Members, particularly Judicial Members.
Many Judicial Member positions remain vacant, even after regular selection processes. A significant factor contributing to this issue is the impact of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, which introduced substantial changes to the service conditions of Judicial Members. Previously, Judicial Members enjoyed benefits comparable to those of sitting High Court judges. However, these benefits have been significantly altered, leading to reluctance among selected candidates to accept appointments. As a result, more than 50 percent of the selected Judicial Members have declined to join, exacerbating the vacancy situation across several Benches. Addressing this issue is crucial to ensuring the smooth functioning and efficiency of the Tribunal.
SRS: The Supreme Court has emphasised the need for more Regional Benches of the AFT, along with Circuit Benches. What is the status currently?
JRM: There are 11 Benches of the AFT across India, including the Principal Bench in Delhi. In addition to the Principal and Regional Benches, Circuit Benches of these Regional Benches are currently functioning at Shimla, Nainital, Bengaluru, Jodhpur, Hyderabad and Goa.
Based on stakeholder requests, additional Circuit Benches can be made functional at the following locations, subject to infrastructure availability and operational requirements:
- Cuttack (Odisha), Ranchi (Jharkhand) and Patna (Bihar) under the jurisdiction of the Kolkata Bench.
- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) under the jurisdiction of the Jabalpur Bench.
- Nagpur (Maharashtra) and Ahmedabad (Gujarat) under the jurisdiction of the Mumbai Bench.
- Gangtok (Sikkim) under the jurisdiction of the Guwahati Bench.
These Circuit Benches may be made functional as needed, and if required, proceedings can later be conducted via video conferencing.
SRS: What is the selection process of Judicial and other Tribunal Members across the country? Should it be streamlined to improve induction of more and better manpower?
JRM: The selection process for Judicial and Administrative Members is currently conducted strictly in accordance with the requirements of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021. The Search Committee is chaired by a sitting Supreme Court judge nominated by the chief justice of India. The Chairperson or President of the respective Tribunal is also a member of the Committee. In cases where the Chairperson or a Member is unavailable or a new selection is required, the CJI nominates a retired chief justice of a High Court. Other members of the Committee are nominated by the government. The selection process is transparent and well-structured, aligning with legal requirements. While I believe significant changes are unnecessary, the service conditions and benefits for members should be reconsidered. This matter remains under judicial scrutiny before the Supreme Court in Madras Bar Association vs Union of India.
A critical challenge faced by the Tribunal is the shortage of manpower. The absence of an effectively functioning regular Service Selection Board has led to a reliance on contract appointments, outsourcing and the hiring of retired personnel. The Supreme Court has taken note of this issue and directed the Union of India to ensure permanent staff appointments for all Tribunals. I am informed that the matter is under active consideration by the government.
SRS: There are around 3,000 pending appeals by the Union defence ministry in several High Courts. In light of this, the Supreme Court has criticised the Union government for repeatedly dragging armed forces personnel and their families to the top court over disputes related to pensions, highlighting the adverse impact of such litigation on the morale within the armed forces. How do AFTs fit in this picture? Are the cases not coming to AFT first? Is there a need to systemize the appeal process?
JRM: The increase in appeals and writ petitions filed by the Union defence ministry before the High Courts and the Supreme Court is a result of the AFT’s efficiency in disposing of cases. Most cases are adjudicated based on well-established legal principles laid down by the Supreme Court and High Courts. However, the Union of India has its own reasons for challenging these decisions. It is for the government to consider the observations made by the higher judiciary and introduce remedial measures where necessary. As I deal with these matters in my judicial capacity, I refrain from making any further observations.
SRS: The AFT’s 2024 judgment granted it contempt powers to enforce orders against willful non-compliance. The central government challenged this, but the Delhi High Court upheld the decision. It is assumed that this tussle stems from the government’s desire to control the Tribunal. The AFT’s powers are crucial for its independence and effectiveness, but the government’s actions may undermine its authority. Your comments.
JRM: Section 19 of the AFT Act, 2007, provides the Tribunal with the power to punish for contempt, but this is limited to instances such as the use of insulting or threatening language, disruptions in court proceedings, or acts of disobedience towards the Tribunal. Unlike other tribunals, such as the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), the AFT does not have the authority to initiate contempt proceedings for non-compliance with its orders.
Certain High Courts, including the Kerala High Court, have held that the Tribunal can invoke contempt jurisdiction when its orders are not implemented. Given the recurring issue of non-compliance with AFT orders, even after filing Execution Applications under Section 25, the matter was referred to a larger bench. In a landmark judgment, the larger bench ruled that the Tribunal does have the power to take contempt action when its orders are not implemented. This judgment is significant as it empowers the AFT to ensure effective justice delivery. Although the matter is currently sub judice before the Delhi High Court at the instance of the Union of India, the judgment has not been stayed. Consequently, in execution proceedings where compliance is unduly delayed, contempt notices are being issued and appropriate action is being taken. This development marks a crucial expansion of the Tribunal’s authority.
SRS: You are also involved along with Bar Council of India in fine-tuning the legal curriculum. What new is happening in this arena?
JRM: As the chairperson of the Standing Committee on Legal Education in the Bar Council, I oversee the regulation of legal education. I have been actively working on curriculum reforms, particularly in introducing mediation and alternative dispute resolution as a mandatory course in law colleges. To uphold educational standards, I conduct surprise inspections of law institutes. Non-compliant institutions are directed to adhere to legal education norms, failing which they are recommended for closure. The Bar Council of India has already taken action against over 30 such institutions preventing them from admitting students for the academic session 2025.
These inspections, conducted confidentially, aim to improve legal education and curb the proliferation of substandard law colleges. With the support of the Bar Council of India and under the guidance of the Supreme Court, I am confident that the legal education system in India will continue to improve in the coming years.
SRS: By the end of your current tenure, what is your bucket list for the AFT?
JRM: As my tenure as chairperson of the AFT concludes in June 2027, I aim to implement several key reforms, including:
- Establishing streamlined procedures to reduce case disposal timelines, particularly for court-martial appeals.
- Advocating for the creation of additional courts at the Principal Bench in New Delhi and the Regional Bench in Chandigarh.
- Enhancing the efficiency of Circuit Benches to provide better access to justice for veterans in areas without Regional Benches.
- Promoting legal awareness among veterans ensuring the proper implementation of policies and circulars related to post-retirement benefits and pensions, in line with individual entitlements.
Through these initiatives, I hope to strengthen the AFT’s role in delivering timely and effective justice to armed forces personnel.