The third respondent examined the request of the Appellant for re engagement and recommended him for companysideration to the Commodore, Bureau of Sailors, Mumbai, the fourth respondent herein.
The sailor has gained companyfidence of his superiors to single handedly resolve technical defects.
The redressal of grievance was disposed of on 15.02.2012 by stating that the Appellant had numberright of re engagement.
The Commanding Officer, INS Vindhyagiri, the fifth respondent herein, recommended the Appellant for re engagement for a period of 5 years to the Flag Officer Commanding in Chief, Headquarters Western Naval Command, the third respondent herein on 06.10.2010.
11 of 2012 assailing the proceedings dated 15.02.2012 by which his redressal of grievance was rejected.
In the said letter dated 06.10.2010, the fifth respondent appreciated the services of the Appellant as follows Despite joining the ship recently, he has proved to be instrumental in executing critical defect rectifications onboard.
The Appellant also submitted a request for redressal of grievance of re engagement for further service for a period of 5 years to the Chief of Naval Staff, the Second Respondent herein.
He also sought a direction to the Respondents to approve his re engagement for 5 years.
As he was in a Low Medical Category S2 A2 PMT , the application for re engagement for a further period of 5 years was required to be routed through Headquarters Western Naval Command, Mumbai.
Aggrieved by the said order dated 04.02.2013, the Appellant has filed the above Appeal.
THE PREVIOUS RECORD OF THE SAILOR IS ALSO INDICATIVE OF LACK OF DESIRED DISCIPLINE CONDUCT ATTRIBUTES.
The Appellant requested the fifth respondent for clarifications on re engagement by a letter dated 21.02.2011.
The Appellant filed an application under Section 31 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 seeking leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court which was rejected on 04.02.2013.
Leave to file Appeal granted.
The said redressal of grievance was forwarded to the Directorate of Personnel and Integrated Headquarters, Ministry of Defence Navy .
It was forwarded to the fourth respondent on 06.04.2011.
11 of 2012.
The Appellant approached the Armed Forces Tribunal, Mumbai by filing Original Application O.A. No.
He received intimation on 06.10.2010 that his initial engagement of 10 years would expire on 31.07.2012.
It was further stated in the said letter dated 15.02.2012 that the Appellant ought to have exercised his option for 2 years re engagement and sought for further extension later on.
In the year 2005, the Appellant suffered an injury while playing Volley Ball due to which he was placed under Low Medical Category S2 A2 PMT .
The Appellant joined the Indian Navy as a Direct Entry Diploma Holder E.D.H. with an initial engagement of 10 years as acting Electrical Artificer 4th Class EAR 4 on 01.08.2002.
NAGESWARA RAO, J. Delay of 13 days in filing the Civil Appeal is companydoned.
By an order dated 04.02.2013, the Armed Forces Tribunal dismissed A. No.
