Delhi High Court
Union Of India & Ors. vs Ex Nk/Dsc Shetye Sitaram Anant on 21 October, 2024
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$~71
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 21.10.2024
+ W.P.(C) 14649/2024
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr.Rajesh Kumar, SPC,
Mr.Rahul Kumar Sharma, Adv.
versus
EX NK/DSC SHETYE SITARAM ANANT .....Respondent
Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 61485/2024 (Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 14649/2024 & CM APPL. 61486/2024, 61487/2024
2. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India assailing the Order dated 22.09.2022 and
subsequent Order dated 27.04.2023 passed by the learned Armed
Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to
as 'Tribunal'), whereby the learned Tribunal disposed of the petition
filed by the respondent herein with the following directions:-
"7. The instant O.A is, therefore, allowed with
the following directions:
(i) The shortfall of less than one year (53
days) of qualifying service for second service
pension is condoned;
(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 him in DSC, from the date of his
discharge; and
(iii) 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. It was the case of the respondent herein before the learned
Tribunal that he was enrolled in the Indian Army on 26.05.1982 and
discharged from service on 28.02.2001, after completing pensionable
service. Thereafter, he was enrolled in the Defence Security Corps (in
short, 'DSC') of the Army on 23.08.2005 and was discharged from
service on 30.06.2020, after rendering 14 years, 10 months and 8 days
of service. As there was a shortfall of 53 days, which is less than 1
year in completing 15 years of service, to become eligible for the
second service pension in the DSC, the same was denied to the
respondent, forcing the respondent to approach the learned Tribunal in
the form of the above petition under Section 14 of the Armed Forces
Tribunal Act, 2007, praying for a direction to the petitioners herein to
condone the above shortfall in service and to grant him service
pension.
4. As noted hereinabove, the learned Tribunal allowed the petition
with the above-quoted directions.
5. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have challenged the same
inter alia contending that the learned Tribunal has exceeded its
jurisdiction in condoning the shortfall of 53 days of the respondent in
achieving the qualifying service for pension in the DSC.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners further urges 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, find no force in the same.
8. This Court, by a 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
OCTOBER 21, 2024/Arya/DG
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
