Last Updated on May 28, 2020 by Satish Mishra
In this post, judgment digest of a case is covered where enhanced pension was awarded to soldier in the rank of Honorary Naib Subedar as per the last rank held by him but he was getting the service pension in the rank of Havildar.
Enhanced pension from the date of Honorary Rank till death and to revised Family pension till OROP was implemented in view of the law settled by Supreme Court in various judicial pronouncements.
Also Read- Dual Pension in Army & from State Government Rule
Deciding Member and Authority:
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE M.S. CHAUHAN, MEMBER (J)
HON’BLE LT GEN MUNISH SIBAL, MEMBER (A)
Complaint No. OA 1713 of 2018
Date of Decision 12th Sept 2018
Applicant:
By Mr. Budh Ram, Advocate for Mr. Ravi Badyal, Advocate
Respondent:
Union of India and others:
By Ms. Sonia Sharma, CGC for Mr. KK Bheniwala Sr PC
Also Read- Aft Popular Judgments Ex Sgt Ram Avtar Yadav
Facts and Judgments of the Case:
The case has been filed in the competent court due to the violation of the right of the Section 14 of the Armed Force Tribunal Act. The Widow of Honorary Naib Subedar late Sh. Bansi Lal Bagh who expired on 17.06.2009 (Annexure A-4). Wife of the deceased person seeks a direction to the respondent to release the enhanced service Pension of her late husband in the Rank of Hony Nb Subedar from the date 01.01.2006. to the date 17.06.2009 and thereafter family pension from the date 18.06.2009 to the date 30.06.2014 as because of the implementation of the OROP i.e. One Rank One Pension on the basis of the precedent judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. vs Virender Singh & Ors. [Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC No.18582 of 2010] decided in the year 13.12.2010 and Union of India& Ors. Vs Subbash Chander Soni [Civil Appeal No.4677 of 2014] decided in the year 2015.
Also Read- Aft Tribunal Advocates and Lawyers in Chandigarh Panchkula and Mohali
Ms Sonia Sharma, CGC accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and does not controvert the factual and legal aspect of the matter as presented before us. The court has overviewed the all the necessary records.
After reading and examining the paper-book reveals that though applicant’s husband was granted the rank of Hony Naib Subedar, but he was getting the service pension in the rank of Havildar and now the applicant’s wife seeks enhanced family pension in the rank of Honorary Naib Subedar.
The respondent side agrees with all the fact’s that is related in this case is similar to as that of mentioned in Virender Singh & others vs. Union of India & others. Respondents agree that the controversy involved in the present case is fully covered by the judgment of this Tribunal in OA No. 42 of 2010 titled Virender Singh and others v. Union of India and others, decided on 08.02.2010 which is also affirmed by the hon’ble supreme court. The respondent even agrees that the said decision also stands affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC No. 18582 of 2010 Union of India and Others v. Virender Singh and others decided on 13.12.2010 and is consistently being followed in similar cases.
Also Read- Punishment of Reprimand by Aft Tribunal
But subsequently there was a precedent of this tribunal in another case, of Baldev Singh vs. union of India & others [OA No. 3146 of 2013] and along with this case 33 other which are connected with this Original Applications (OAs) are decided on the basis of the judgement given in the Virender Singh’s case (supra) as per held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
In this case, the respondents filed an appeal only in one case, as in ‘Union of India and others Vs. Subbash Chander Soni’ [Civil Appeal No. 4677 of 2014], which was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 20.05.2015.
So as per this stage, the authorised and responsible counsel for the respondent’s side ventilated to restrict the arrears to the six months. According to the respondent, the earlier also the counsels have presented the plea before the Tribunal for the case of Union of India i.e., Baldev Singh vs. Union of India & others (supra), where the Leave to Appeal was granted to the respondents.
Also Read- Claiming Disability Pension from Aft Tribunal
The Special Leave Petition i.e., SLP filed as in the case of ‘Union of India and others vs. Subbash Chander Soni’ [Civil Appeal No.4677 of 2014], was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 20.05.2015 and the petitioner held entitled to the benefit from 01.01.2006.
According to the reports the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case of ‘Union of India & Ors Vs. Sohan Lal Bawa and others [CA No. s 5478, 5479 and 5480 of 2011] which was decided on 07.07.2011. In this case it was observed that only a Havildar granted Honorary rank of Naib Subedar prior to retirement, would be entitled to such benefits. There was a similar judgement which has been considered with the relevant rule position by this Tribunal in case of ‘Raghbir Singh & Ors Vs UOI & Ors [OA No 1327 of 2011] which was decided on 21.10.2011. In this case it was held that entitlement and providing that the legal position is not affected due to Honorary rank of Naib Subedar being granted only after retirement. The Union of India filed Review Petition (Civil) No. 265 of 2013 which was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 06.03.2013. As such, the legal position as decided in Virender Singh (Supra) and as clarified in Raghbir Singh’s case (Supra) remains unchanged.
Also Read- Military Pension as Per Length of Service-aft Chandigarh
The court has rejected the plea which was claimed by the respondents which was to restrict the arrears to six month holds no valid ground. However, the court also clarified that “no “no interest shall be payable” in such cases.
The court clearly said that that all the controversy which is claimed under this case is clearly covered by the judgements which has already mentioned previously. Therefore, there is no valid ground with the respondent to stop the due arrears which was to be paid to the applicant and cannot be denied.
Also Read- Revision of Pension Based on Last Rank- AFT Chandigarh Bench
The case was disposed of keeping all the judgements in view mentioned above in this case and the direction was given to the respondent to release the funds to the applicant i.e., enhanced Service Pension from the date 01.01.2006 to 17.06.2009 (date of death) and thereafter revised Family Pension from the date 18.06.2009 to 30.06.2014 (i.e. upto the date of implementation of One Rank One Pension i.e., OROP). The court also instructed the respondent that all the arrears should be cleared within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order by the representative of the respondents. The court also said that there shall be no interest to be paid along with the arrears by the respondent to the applicant, shall be admissible and paid as already settled by the Honourable Supreme Court. But there was also a condition given by the court to the respondent that if the arrears are not cleared within the stipulated time provided by the court i.e., within 3 months, after that the respondent have to the pay the arrear along with the interest @ 8% to the applicant from the date of this order.
The Original Application is allowed and disposed of after observing and after giving proper direction to the respondent and with all the due and necessary verification the case is disposed of.
Before concluding the judgement, the court also said that we wish to place on record our severe displeasure and dismay with regard to the manner in which the respondents are approaching orders passed by this Tribunal. We hope and expect that good sense will prevail upon the authorities concerned and they would learn to honour the orders passed by the Courts.
Also Read- Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) Chandigarh Bench FAQ
For case specific advice, please call Armed Force Tribunal Chandigarh/Chandimandir Bench Service Matter Lawyers & Advocates.
This post is written by Aman Dube.
For more info, dial 99888-17966.
