Supreme Court of India sought Union response on vacancies in Armed Forces Tribunal. Bench of Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi sought R Venkataramani assistance, listing hearing.
The Supreme Court of India sought responses from the Union government and other stakeholders on a petition highlighting the growing vacancies in the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT). The plea calls for the completion of the recruitment and selection process within a fixed timeline to ensure that vacant positions across the Tribunal are filled without further delay.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi agreed to examine the issue and requested the assistance of R Venkataramani. The Court also directed the petitioner’s counsel, appearing for the Armed Forces Tribunal Bar Association (Regional Bench), to submit a copy of the petition to the Attorney General’s office for consideration. The matter has been listed for further hearing after two weeks.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Introduces New Circuit Benches for Armed Forces Tribunal to Reduce Workload
Providing context, the petition points to the critical role played by the AFT in adjudicating disputes and service matters relating to members of the armed forces. It highlights that the Tribunal is currently facing a severe shortage of personnel, which is affecting its functioning. According to the submissions made before the Court, out of 11 benches of the Tribunal, only three are likely to remain functional by the end of the year if vacancies are not filled promptly.
The plea seeks specific directions to the Centre to complete the ongoing selection process in a time-bound manner, in accordance with Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007. It refers in particular to Section 5 of the Act, which governs the composition and structure of the Tribunal, including the appointment of judicial and administrative members.
Additionally, the petition urges the Court to allow existing members of the Tribunal to continue in office subject to their consent until new appointments are made. This, the petitioner argues, is necessary to prevent disruption in the functioning of the Tribunal and to ensure that cases involving armed forces personnel are not left pending due to administrative gaps.
The Supreme Court’s intervention is seen as an important step toward addressing delays in military justice delivery, with the outcome of the case likely to impact both the efficiency and accessibility of the Tribunal system.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE