Delhi High Court
Union Of India And Ors vs Smt Dhanuli Devi Widow Of Late Lnk Dsc Pan ... on 5 November, 2024
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$~54
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 05.11.2024
+ W.P.(C) 15396/2024, CM APPLs. 64545-64547/2024
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jai Prakash, SPC.
Maj. Anish Murlidhar (Army).
versus
SMT DHANULI DEVI WIDOW OF LATE L/NK (DSC) PAN
SINGH .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Banvendra Singh Gandhar
& Mr. Ravi Kant Gautam,
Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)
CM APPL. 64545/2024 (Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 15396/2024 & CM APPL. 64546-547/2024
2. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India assailing the Order dated 17.07.2023 passed by
the learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi
(hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in OA No. 1871/2023, titled Smt
Dhanuli Devi Wd/o Late L/Nk (DSC) Pan Singh v. Union of India &
Ors., whereby the learned Tribunal disposed of the OA filed by the
respondent herein, with the following directions:-
"12. The instant O.A. 1871/2023 is, therefore,
allowed with the following directions:
(i) The shortfall of 111 days of qualifying
service as claimed in the O.A. for grant of
second service pension to the late husband of
the applicant of the DSC is condoned.
However, if the respondents on verification of
the records find a different figure for number
of days requiring to be condoned then it is
directed that they should accord the required
condonation as long as it is less than one year;
(ii) Subject to verification of records, the
respondents are directed to issue a
corrigendum PPO to the applicant granting
second service pension for the service
rendered by her 1ate husband in the DSC,
from the date of his discharge till the date of
his death;
(iii) The respondents are further directed to
grant family pension to the applicant w.e.f. the
date of demise of the late husband of the
applicant; and
(iv) The arrears shall be paid within four
months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order. In default, the applicant will be
entitled to interest @ 6% per annum till
payment."
3. Before the learned Tribunal, it was the case of the respondent
herein that the respondent's late husband was enrolled in the Indian
Army on 14.05.1962 and discharged from service on 31.05.1977, after
completing pensionable service. Thereafter, he was enrolled in the
Defence Security Corps (in short, 'DSC') of the Army on 20.09.1983
and was discharged from service on 31.05.1998, after rendering 14
years 8 months and 11 days of service. As there was a shortfall of 111
days in completing 15 years of service to become eligible for the
second service pension in the DSC, the same was denied to the
respondent. Consequently, forcing the respondent to approach the
learned Tribunal in the form of the above OA under Section 14 of the
Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, praying for a direction to the
petitioner herein to condone the above shortfall in service and to grant
service pension.
4. As noted hereinabove, the learned Tribunal allowed the petition
with the above-quoted directions.
5. Aggrieved of the same, the petitioner has challenged the same
inter alia contending that the learned Tribunal has exceeded its
jurisdiction in condoning the shortfall of 111 days of the respondent,
thereby completing the qualifying service of the respondent for
pension in the DSC.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner further asserts that the
learned Tribunal has failed to consider the Policy Letter
No.14(02)/2011/D/(Pen/Pol) dated 20.06.2017 issued by the
Government of India through the Ministry of Defence (Department of
Ex-Servicemen Welfare), which states that no condonation shall be
allowed for grant of second service pension.
7. We have considered the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, however, we find no force in the same.
8. This Court, by the Judgment passed in Union of India & Ors. v.
Ex/NK Chinna Vediyappan, Neutral Citation 2024:DHC:6858-DB,
has rejected a similar challenge by holding as under:
"22. It is also noteworthy that the scheme of
the Regulations in itself provide for two
independent service pensions, one for service
in the Indian Army and the second for the
service in the DSC. It is only because of the
provision for two service pensions in the
Regulations that the respondents, while joining
the DSC, did not opt for including their past
service in the Indian Army and have,
therefore, been deprived of benefits which
could have accrued to them had they sought
inclusion of their past service with the Army.
Merely because the claim of the respondents, if
allowed, would entitle them to earn a second
pension, which is envisaged in the Regulations
itself, the petitioners cannot be permitted to
raise a plea which is contrary to the specific
provisions of the Regulations.
23. We have also considered the letters dated
23.04.2012 and 20.06.2017 issued by the
Ministry of Defence, wherein it has been
provided that no condonation for shortfall in
qualifying service will be granted for second
service pension with the DSC. Even though we
find that these letters already stand quashed
by the learned Tribunal in Ex Mohanan T
(supra), we have, at the insistence of the
learned counsel for the petitioners, examined
the same, but are of the view that once the
pension Regulations do not create any bar for
condonation of shortfall in qualifying service,
contrary instructions could not have been
issued by the Ministry of Defence. It is trite
law that administrative instructions cannot
override the statutory regulations and
therefore, we are of the considered opinion
that the petitioners, by way of these letters,
could not deprive the respondents of the rights
accruing to them under the specific provisions
of the Pension Regulations."
9. In view of the above, we find no merit in the present petition.
The same is dismissed. The pending applications also stand disposed
of as infructuous.
10. There shall be no order as to costs.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
SHALINDER KAUR, J
NOVEMBER 05, 2024/ab/B/as
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
