Allahabad High Court
Ram Nakshatra Singh vs Union Of India And 4 Others on 28 May, 2024
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:96908-DB
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8583 of 2022
Petitioner :- Ram Nakshatra Singh
Respondent :- Union Of India And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Devendra Dahma
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Akhilesh Kumar,Hridaya Narayan Mishra,Sanjai Singh
Hon'ble Arun Bhansali, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar, J.
1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 18.12.2017 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow to the extent that the benefit under the said order has been restricted to three preceeding year from the date of filing of the petition i.e. with effect from 29.08.2014. The petitioner approached the Armed Forces Tribunal seeking rounding off of disability pension to 50% for life. Reliance was placed on judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Ram Avtar & others : Civil Appeal No. 418 of 2012 decided on 10 December, 2014.
2. The Tribunal by the impugned order came to the conclusion that the petitioner was entitled to rounding off of disability pension to 50% for life, however, restricted the benefit to three years from the date of filing of the petition i.e. with effect from 29.08.2014.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that the Tribunal was not justified in restricting the said benefit to three years from the date of filing of the petition and the petitioner was entitled to the said benefit with effect from 01.01.1996. Reliance was placed on judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Davinder Singh vs. Union of India & others : Civil Appeal No. 9946 of 2016 decided on 20.09.2016. Further submission has been made that the said direction has been followed by other Benches of the Tribunal.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents contested the submissions made. It was sumitted that the writ petition was not maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 30 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act and that in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & others vs. Tarsem Singh : Civil Appeal No. 5151-5252 of 2008 decided on 13.08.2008, restricting the relief to three years is justified.
5. We have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. So far as the maintainability of the writ petition is concerned, the issue is no more res-integra as Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Parashotan Dass : 2023 SCC OnLine SC 314 has laid down that such a petition would be maintainable.
7. Coming to the relief granted by the Tribunal restricting the same to three years from the date of filing of the petition, the said issue also apparently is no more res-integra as in similar matter in the case of Davinder Singh (Supra) Hon'ble Supreme Court inter-alia observed and directed as under :
"Leave granted.
This appeal arises out of an Order dated 04.11.2011 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh whereby O.A. No. 1289 of 2011 has been allowed in part and the appellant held entitled to the benefit of rounding off w.e.f. 01.01.1996. The Tribunal has however directed that the appellant shall be entitled to claim arrears subject to adjustment of the amount already paid to him only for a period of three years prior to the filing of the application moved by him before the Tribunal. It is that part of the order only which has been assailed before us in the present appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the Tribunal has while holding the appellant entitled to the benefit of rounding off inter alia placed reliance on a similar order passed by the Tribunal in a bunch of 85 cases allowed and disposed off vide Order dated 06.04.2011 in T.A. No. 1077 of 2010 (Jai Singh Vs. UOI & Ors.) along with other connected cases. The said order when challenged before this Court was affirmed. From a reading of the order passed by the Tribunal in Jai Singh's case supra, it is evident that the Tribunal had while allowing the batch of petitions held the appellants therein, who were retirees prior to 01.01.1996, to the benefit of rounding off of disability pension as per letter dated 31.01.2001. The benefit was given w.e.f. 01.01.1996. Arrears w.e.f. 01.01.1996 with interest @ 8% p.a. were also allowed. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that arrears w.e.f. 01.01.1996 having been allowed by the High Court in the relied upon judgment with interest @ 8% p.a., there was no reason for reducing the said period to three years only immediately prior to the filing of the petition in the case of the appellant. It is submitted that this Court having already affirmed the view taken in Jai Singh's case, similar relief could be granted to the appellant also. We find merit in that submission. From a perusal of the order passed in Jai Singh's case, it appears that while most of the cases disposed off in the said batch were transferred cases where writ petitions had been filed earlier than 2010, there were half a dozen fresh cases that were filed in the year 2010 and later. The Tribunal had notwithstanding the delay in the filing of the O.As granted redress to the petitioners in the said batch of case w.e.f. 01.01.1996 with interest @8% p.a. That being so and the order passed by the Tribunal in Jai Singh's case and batch of cases having been affirmed by this Court, we see no distinction between the cases dealt with by the Tribunal in that batch and the appellant's case to warrant a differential treatment to him in the matter of grant of arrears. We accordingly allow this appeal and modify the order passed by the Tribunal to the extend that the appellant shall also on the analogy of the order passed by the Tribunal in Jai Singh's case supra be entitled to arrears payable to him by reason of rounding off of disability pension w.e.f. 01.01.1996 with interest @ 8% p.a. subject to adjustment of any amount already received by him for the said period. We are told by learned counsel for the respondent that the appellant has already received the benefit of arrears w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to 01.07.2009. If that be so, arrears will be confined only to the period that has not already been paid for. No costs."
(emphasis supplied)
8. Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly came to the conclusion that restricting the relief for three years prior to the filing of the petition was not justified and directed grant of relief from 01.01.1996.
9. In so far as the judgement in the case of Tarsem Singh (Supra) relied on by the counsel for the respondents is concerned, though the principle laid down therein is well setted, however, in view of the fact that the judgement in the case of Davinder Singh (Supra) pertains to the same controversy and identical facts, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly opined that those entitled for rounding off of the pension would be entitled with effect from 01.01.1996, the judgement in the case of Tarsem Singh (Supra) would have no application.
10. In view thereof, the order passed by the Tribunal being contrary to the order in the case of Davinder Singh (Supra), the same cannot be sustained. However, in all fairness the interest allowed by Tribunal @ 10% p.a. is required to be reduced to 8% as awarded by Hon'ble Supreme Court.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that the petitioner has not been paid interest, as awarded by the Tribunal and that a sum of Rs.2,88,379/- has been deducted from the amount payable under the order passed by the Tribunal. For the said aspect of the matter, the petitioner has to take remedy in accordance with law.
12. Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed, the order impugned passed by the Tribunal shall stand modified to the extent that instead of restricting the relief to three years from the date of filing of the petition, the petitioner would be entitled to arrears with effect from 01.01.1996 along with interest @ 8% p.a. and the same be paid to him within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order. The amount already paid be adjusted.
Order Date :- 28.5.2024
nd
(Vikas Budhwar, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)
