Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sita Sharma vs Union Of India on 13 May, 2025
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: G. S. Ahluwalia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10567
1 WP-18311-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA
ON THE 13th OF MAY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 18311 of 2023
SITA SHARMA
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Mr. Gaurav Mishra - Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. Praveen Kumar Newaskar - Deputy Solicitor General for
respondents / Union of India.
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed
seeking the following reliefs :-
"(i) That, the respondents may kindly be directed to start the
family pension to the petitioner considering the investigation
report of District Sanik Welfare Office, Morena, District Morena
(MP).
(ii) That, the respondents may kindly be directed to pay the arrears
of family pension to the petitioner w.ef. May, 2016 to till date
with 12% annual interest thereon.
(iii) That, any other suitable relief as deemed fit by this Hon'ble
Court may kindly be granted in favour of petitioner in the facts
and circumstances of case for | doing justice in the matter. Cost
may also kindly be awarded to the petitioner looking to the
hardships in view of the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. A preliminary objection has been raised by Shri Praveen Newaskar
that in view of Section 3 (o) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, any
dispute pertaining to pension is a service matter. It is submitted that
therefore, in view of Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10567
2 WP-18311-2023
only the Armed Forces Tribunal has original jurisdiction to entertain such
dispute and this petition filed directly before this Court is not maintainable.
3. In reply, it is submitted by counsel for petitioner that the Supreme
Court in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Parashotam Dass decided
on 21.03.2023 in Civil Appeal No.447/2023 has held that against the order
passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, the aggrieved persons can approach
the High Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. It is submitted that
very purpose for providing an additional forum to approach the Highest
Court of the State is with the solitary intention to provide the forum which is
nearer to the aggrieved person. It is submitted that merely because the
petitioner has not approached the Armed Forces Tribunal, she may not be
non-suited on the ground of jurisdiction.
4. Heard counsel for parties.
5. Section 3 (o) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 reads as
under :-
"(o) "service matters", in relation to the persons subject to the
Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1950), the Navy Act, 1957 (62 of 1957)
and the Air Force Act, 1950 (45 of 1950), mean all matters
relating to the conditions of their service and shall include-
(i) remuneration (including allowances), pension and other
retirement benefits;
(ii) tenure, including commission, appointment, enrolment,
probation, confirmation, seniority, training, promotion,
reversion, premature retirement, superannuation, termination
of service and penal deductions;
(iii) summary disposal and trials where the punishment of
dismissal is awarded;
(iv) any other matter, whatsoever, but shall not include
matters relating to-
(i) orders issued under section 18 of the Army Act,
1950 (46 of 1950), sub-section (1) of section 15 of the
Navy Act, 1957 (62 of 1957) and section 18 of the Air
Force Act, 1950 (45 of 1950); and
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10567
3 WP-18311-2023
(ii) transfers and postings including the change of place
or unit on posting whether individually or as a part of
unit, formation or ship in relation to the persons subject
to the Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1950), the Navy Act,
1957 (62 of 1957) and the Air Force Act, 1950 (45 of
1950).
(iii) leave of any kind;
(iv) Summary Court Martial except where the
punishment is of dismissal or imprisonment for more
than three months;"
6. Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 reads as under :-
"14. Jurisdiction, powers and authority in service matters. - (1)
Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the Tribunal
shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, all the jurisdiction,
powers and authority, exercisable immediately before that day by
all courts (except the Supreme Court or a High Court exercising
jurisdiction under article 226 and 227 of the Constitution) in
relation to all service matters.
(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a person
aggrieved by an order pertaining to any service matter may make
an application to the Tribunal in such form and accompanied by
such documents or other evidence and on payment of such fee as
may be prescribed.
(3) On receipt of an application relating to service matters, the
Tribunal shall, if satisfied after due inquiry, as it may deem
necessary, that it is fit for adjudication by it, admit such
application; but where the Tribunal is not so satisfied, it may
dismiss the application after recording its reasons in writing.
(4) For the purpose of adjudicating an application, the Tribunal
shall have the same powers as are vested in a Civil Court under
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), while trying a suit
in respect of the following matters, namely:-
(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person
and examining him on oath;
(b) requiring the discovery and production of documents;
(c) receiving evidence on affidavits;
(d) subject to the provisions of section 123 and 124 of the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), requisitioning any
public record or document or copy of such record or
document from any office;
(e) issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or
documents;
(f) reviewing its decisions;
(g) dismissing an application for default or deciding it ex
parte;
(h) setting aside any order of dismissal of any application for
default or any order passed by it ex parte; and
(i) any other matter which may be prescribed by the Central
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10567
4 WP-18311-2023
Government.
(5) The Tribunal shall decide both questions of law and facts
that may be raised before it."
7. Section 34 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 reads as under :-
"34. Transfer of pending cases. - (1) Every suit, or other
proceeding pending before any court including a High Court or
other authority immediately before the date of establishment of the
Tribunal under this Act, being a suit or proceeding the cause of
action whereon it is based, is such that it would have been within
the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, if it had arisen after such
establishment within the jurisdiction of such Tribunal, stand
transferred on that date to such Tribunal.
(2) Where any suit, or other proceeding stands transferred from
any court including a High Court or other authority to the Tribunal
under sub-section (1),--
(a) the court or other authority shall, as soon as may be, after
such transfer, forward the records of such suit, or other proceeding
to the Tribunal;
(b) the Tribunal may, on receipt of such records, proceed to deal
with such suit, or other proceeding, so far as may be, in the same
manner as in the case of an application made under sub-section (2)
of section 14, from the stage which was reached before such
transfer or from any earlier stage or de novo as the Tribunal may
deem fit."
8. In the present petition also, petitioner is claiming family pension as
her husband was working in the Army, therefore, undisputedly, the subject
matter of this petition is squarely covered by the definition of "service
matters" as given under Section 3 (o) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act,
2007.
9. So far as judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of
Parashotam Dass (supra) is concerned, it is distinguishable on the facts. In
that case, the Supreme Court has held that an aggrieved person can approach
the High Court against an order passed by the Armed forces Tribunal but the
Supreme Court has not held that in spite of specific bar as contained under
Sections 14 and 34 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, the High Court
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10567
5 WP-18311-2023
can entertain the grievance of the parties covered under Section 3 (o) of the
Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 even on its original side of the
jurisdiction.
10. Considering the bar as contained under Section 14 and 34 of the
Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, this Court is of the considered opinion
that since the subject matter is covered by Section 3 (o) of the Armed Forces
Tribunal Act, therefore, this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this
petition.
11. Accordingly, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the
appropriate forum, this petition is dismissed on the ground of non-
maintainability.
(G. S. AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE
AKS
