https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182879 A writ challenge to a Rule 14 Army Rules show cause notice was maintainable where the officer questioned the authority's competence to issue it, so the objection of prematurity failed once the notice was found within jurisdiction. The Court also held that the Army Act and Rules do not bar resort to Rule 14 merely because a court-martial had already occurred and a finding on revision remained unconfirmed; if a further court-martial is considered inexpedient or impracticable and continued retention undesirable, termination proceedings may validly be initiated. The impugned notice was therefore upheld and the High Court's contrary view was set aside. en-us Thu, 21 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 May 2016 16:49:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182879 A writ challenge to a Rule 14 Army Rules show cause notice was maintainable where the officer questioned the authority's competence to issue it, so the objection of prematurity failed once the notice was found within jurisdiction. The Court also held that the Army Act and Rules do not bar resort to Rule 14 merely because a court-martial had already occurred and a finding on revision remained unconfirmed; if a further court-martial is considered inexpedient or impracticable and continued retention undesirable, termination proceedings may validly be initiated. The impugned notice was therefore upheld and the High Court's contrary view was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 21 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182879