1. Claim for Special Family Pension following the death of army personnel in a road accident while on casual leave. (Para 6 )
Back
Next 
2019 Supreme(SC) 2180
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ashok Bhushan, Navin Sinha, JJ.
Renu Devi - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 2538 of 2019(@ Diary No(s). 37356/2017)
Decided On : 03-07-2019
Important Points
The interpretation and application of Regulation 213 of Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961, and the Government of India's order dated 31.01.2001 in determining the eligibility for Special Family Pension.
Subject
Civil Law - Family Law
Act Referred
PENSION REGULATIONS: Reg..213
Headnote
Special Family Pension - Armed Forces Tribunal - Rule 10, Regulation 213 of Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961, Government of India's order dated 31.01.2001 - The court discussed the interpretation of Rule 10, Regulation 213, and the Government of India's order in relation to the grant of Special Family Pension. It highlighted that casual leave counts as duty but does not automatically entitle to special family pension. The court emphasized that the Regulation 213 must be satisfied before granting the Special Family Pension, as per the policy formulated by the Ministry of Defence in the Government of India's order dated 31.01.2001. The court concluded that the claimants were not covered by either category 'B' or 'C' as per the policy, and therefore, the Tribunal did not commit any error in rejecting the claim.
Fact of the Case:
The appeals were filed challenging the orders of the Armed Forces Tribunal dismissing the claims for Special Family Pension in two cases where the deceased husbands were serving in the Army and died under different circumstances.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the claimants were not entitled to the Special Family Pension as they did not fulfill the conditions specified in Regulation 213 and the Government of India's order dated 31.01.2001.
Issues: Interpretation of Rule 10, Regulation 213, and the Government of India's order in relation to the grant of Special Family Pension.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the Regulation 213 must be satisfied before granting the Special Family Pension, as per the policy formulated by the Ministry of Defence in the Government of India's order dated 31.01.2001.
Final Decision: The Civil Appeals were dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates Appeared:
Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Sr. Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, AOR, for the Appellant; Mr. K.M. Natraj, ASG Mr. R. Bala, Sr. Adv. Ms. Alka Agrawala, Adv. Mr. Shashank Kumar, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR, for the Respondent
Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Sr. Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, AOR, for the Appellant; Mr. K.M. Natraj, ASG Mr. R. Bala, Sr. Adv. Ms. Alka Agrawala, Adv. Mr. Shashank Kumar, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR, for the Respondent
Table of Contents
2. Whether personnel on casual leave are treated as on duty for the purpose of granting Special Family Pension. (Para 7 , 8 )
3. Treatment of casual leave as duty does not automatically entitle a family to Special Family Pension; specific attribution to military service under regulations is required. (Para 14 , 15 )
4. Special Family Pension requires death to be attributable to or aggravated by military service as per regulations, regardless of whether the personnel was on casual leave. (Para 11 , 14 , 15 )
5. Civil appeals dismissed. (Para 16 )
6. Does the fact that casual leave counts as duty automatically entitle the family of a deceased personnel to a Special Family Pension?
No. While casual leave counts as duty, this does not create an automatic entitlement to a Special Family Pension. The death must still be attributable to or aggravated by military service as per Regulation 213 and relevant government policies. (Para 14 )
7. What are the conditions for granting a Special Family Pension under the Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961?
A special family pension may be granted if the individual's death was due to or hastened by a wound, injury, or disease attributable to military service, or the aggravation of such conditions by military service. (Para 11 )
8. How is attributability to military service determined for the purpose of pensionary benefits?
It is determined based on specific categories, such as death due to causes accepted as attributable or aggravated by competent medical authorities, or accidents occurring in the performance of duties, such as traveling on duty in government or public transport. (Para 13 )
ORDER
Ashok Bhushan, J. - Leave granted.
2. These two appeals raising common questions of law have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.
3. Civil Appeal arising out of Diary No. 37356 of 2017 -Renu Devi Vs. Union of India & Ors. has been filed challenging the order dated 25.04.2017 passed by Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh Regional Bench at Chandimandir, by which O.A. No. 4313 of 2013 filed by the appellant praying for grant of Special Family Pension w.e.f. 15.09.2004 has been dismissed. M.A. No. 1075 of 2017 seeking leave to appeal has also been dismissed by Armed Forces Tribunal by order dated 10.07.2017.
4. Civil Appeal No. 2538 of 2019 has been filed against the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal dated 08.05.2018, by which O.A. No. 449 of 2014 filed by Smt. Rekha Devi praying for grant of Special Family Pension w.e.f. 18.06.2003 has been rejected.
5. It shall be sufficient to notice the facts in Civil Appeal arising out of Diary No. 37356 of 2017 - Renu Devi vs. Union of India & Ors. for deciding these two appeals.
6. The husband of the appellant Late Sepoy Vikash died while on casual leave on 14.09.2004. O.A. No. 4313 of 2013 was filed praying for grant of Special Family Pension. Late Sepoy Vikash joined the Army Service on 30.07.2000 and died on 14.09.2004 in a road accident while he was on 14 days' casual leave w.e.f. 04.09.2004 to 17.09.2004. The Tribunal rejected the claim holding that it is not covered by the Regulations. Aggrieved by the said judgment, this appeal has been filed.
7. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that the deceased husband being on casual leave, he has to be treated for all purposes on duty and when husband of the appellant died on duty, he is entitled for the Special Family Pension. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on Leave Rules for the Services (Volume - I - Army), Rule 10.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the Union of India submits that Armed Forces Tribunal has rightly rejected the claim since it is not covered by the Statutory Regulations and conditions for grant of Special Family Pension were not fulfilled in the present cases. Learned counsel submits that the Tribunal has referred to relevant Regulations as well as Government of India's order.
9. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance on Rule 10, which dealt with casual leave, which is to the following effect:-
"10. Casual leave counts as duty except as provided for in Rule 11(a).
It cannot be utilised to supplement any other form of leave or absence, except as provided for in clause (A) of Rule 72 for personnel participating in sporting events and tournaments.
Casual leave due in a year can only be taken within that year. If, however, an individual is granted casual leave at the end of the year extending to the next year, the period falling in the latter year will be debited against the casual leave entitlement of that year."
11. Regulation 213 of Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961 (Part-I) provides as follows:-
"213. A special family pension may be granted to the family of an individual if his death was due to or hastened by -
(a) a wound, injury or disease which was attributable to military service,
OR
(b) the aggravation by military service of a wound, injury or disease, which existed before or arose during military service."
12. Government of India has also issued an order on 31.01.2001 dealing with Family Pensionary Benefits in Attributable/Aggravated cases. Part II of the O.M. dated 31.01.2001 is as follows:-
"5. Special Family Pension (SFP)
5.1 In case of death of an Armed Forces Personnel under the circumstances mentioned in category "B" or "C" of Para 4 above, Special Family Pension shall continue to be admissible to the families of such personnel under the same conditions as in force hitherto.
13. Categories "B" and "C" mentioned in P
