Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, ALOK ARADHE, JJ.
Union of India through its Secretary and Others – Appellants
Versus
SGT Girish Kumar and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 6820-6824 of 2018 With Civil Appeal Nos. 8286-8287 of 2018 Civil Appeal No. 1555 of 2024 Civil Appeal No. 2515 of 2019 Civil Appeal No(s). of 2026 (@ DIARY NO(S). 34570 of 2019) Civil Appeal No. 3091 of 2024 Civil Appeal No (s). of 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO(S). 19082 OF 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). OF 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 35558 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 36222 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 36816 OF 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 36817 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(s). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 36820 of 2025) Civil Appeal No. 1724 of 2023 Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO(S). 14571 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO(S). 14572 of 2025) Civil Appeal No. 9637 of 2025 Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO(S). 21766 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(s). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 34197 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(s). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). OF 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 36809 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(s). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 46724 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). OF 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). OF 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 50514 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 62180 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 69396 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO(S). 25515 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). OF 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 38429 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). OF 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 41932 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). OF 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 41937 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). OF 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO(S). 25518 OF 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO(S). 25517 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). OF 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 47828 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 49078 of 2025) Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 59291 OF 2025) And Civil Appeal No(S). of 2026 (@ S.L.P. (C) NO(S). of 2026) (DIARY NO(S). 73845 of 2025)
Decided On : 12-02-2026
.(A) Service Law – Disability Pension – Entitlement – Pension is neither a bounty nor an ex-gratia payment dependent upon grace of State – It is a deferred portion of compensation for past service and upon fulfilment of governing conditions, matures into a vested and enforceable right – Pensionary entitlements partake character of property, and cannot be withheld, reduced, or extinguished except by authority of law – This principle applies with full vigour to disability pension, which is grounded not merely in length of service, but in impairment suffered by a member of Armed Forces in course of, or attributable to service rendered to nation – Disability pension is not a matter of largesse, but a recognition of sacrifice made in service of nation – Union of India, as a model employer, is expected to act with fairness, consistency and even-handedness in administration of benefits conferred upon those who have served nation – When a benefit is recognised by a policy and affirmed by judicial pronouncement, its application cannot be selective or uneven. (Paras 15 and 16)
(B) Service Law – Disability Pension – [Article 300A of Constitution of India] – Entitlement – Where State itself, by a conscious policy decision, has determined that arrears of disability pension are payable from a specified cut-off date, it is not open to it to subsequently resile and contend that such arrears ought to be confined to a period of three years preceding the claim – To permit such a course, would amount to acknowledging right in principle while denying its substantive content in effect – Any such deprivation of accrued arrears which has become due to ex-servicemen in view of judicial determination as well as policy decision taken by Union of India itself, would constitute deprivation of property and would amount to infraction of Article 300A of Constitution of India – Right to receive disability pension is a valuable right and once found due, benefit of same has to be given from the date it became due – Same cannot be curtailed by restricting benefit to a period of three years preceding filing of original application – In absence of any compelling reason to take a different view, no justification to depart from view consistently taken by Supreme Court – Contention that claims of ex-servicemen were barred by limitation does not deserve acceptance – Orders passed by Tribunal set aside. (Paras 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23)
Facts of the case:
Present appeals, filed both by the Union of India and by Ex-servicemen, under Section 30 of Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, arise out of conflicting decisions of Armed Forces Tribunal concerning period for which arrears of disability pension are payable. Tribunal in certain cases directed payment of arrears of disability pension from specified cut-off dates, whereas, in others, restricted such benefits to 3 years prior to filing of the applications before Tribunal. Present batch of appeals require this Court to determine whether entitlement to disability pension, once judicially affirmed, can be curtailed beyond a prescribed period by invoking limitation, delay or laches.
The solitary issue which arises for consideration is whether benefit of arrears of disability pension can be restricted to three years prior to filing of original applications before Tribunal.
Findings of Court:
In facts and circumstances of the case, original applications filed by the ex-servicemen do not suffer from any delay or laches disentitling them from claiming relief of arrears of disability pension. Objections founded on the delay and limitation are without any merit.
Result : Appeals partly allowed.
The provisions of law involved in this case primarily include the following:
The constitutional guarantee against deprivation of property, as enshrined in Article 300A of the Constitution of India, which provides that no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law (!) .
The statutory framework governing pension and disability pension for armed forces personnel, including the relevant Pension Regulations for the Army, which recognize the entitlement of retiring or discharged personnel with disabilities attributable to or aggravated by military service to receive disability pension (!) .
The provisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, particularly Section 30, which provides the jurisdiction and authority of the Armed Forces Tribunal to adjudicate disputes related to pension and other service-related benefits (!) .
The instructions and policies issued by the government, including directives regarding the implementation of disability pension benefits and the extension of arrears from specified cut-off dates, which are grounded in administrative law principles and the statutory powers conferred upon the government (!) .
The relevant provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, which govern the period within which claims for arrears of pension can be filed, although the Court held that these limitations do not apply where rights have accrued and been judicially recognized (!) .
The principles of property law and legal entitlement, which establish that pension rights, once vested, are enforceable and cannot be arbitrarily restricted or extinguished except under lawful authority (!) .
These provisions collectively underpin the legal framework relating to the entitlement, protection, and enforcement of disability pension rights for ex-servicemen, and the Court’s interpretation of these laws forms the basis of the judgment.
JUDGMENT
ALOK ARADHE, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals, filed both by the Union of India and by Ex-servicemen, under Section 30 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 (‘Act’) arise out of conflicting decisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal (‘Tribunal’) concerning the period for which arrears of disability pension are payable. The Tribunal in certain cases directed payment of arrears of disability pension from specified cut-off dates, whereas, in others, restricted such benefits to 3 years prior to filing of the applications before the Tribunal. The present batch of appeals require this Court to determine whether entitlement to disability pension, once judicially affirmed, can be curtailed beyond a prescribed period by invoking limitation, delay or laches.
(i) FACTUAL MATRIX
3. For the sake of convenience, the facts in Civil Appeal Nos.6820-6824 of 2018 are noticed. The respondent in C.A. Nos.6820-6824 of 2018 was enrolled on 30.03.1988 in the Indian Air Force and was discharged on 31.03.2008 upon completion of tenure. At the time of discharge, he was assessed with disability attributable to and aggravated by military service at 20% for life and was granted disability pension accordingly. Pursuant to judgment rendered by a three-Judge Bench of this Court dated 10.12.2014 in Union of India and Others v. Ram Avtar, 2014 SCC Online SC 1761 the respondent approached the Tribunal on 20.10.2016 by filing an original application, seeking broad banding of disability pension to 50% along with arrears from the date of discharge. The Tribunal, by an order dated 13.12.2017, extended the benefit of broad banding of pension to the respondent from the date of his superannuation.
(ii) REFERENCE TO THE FULL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL
4. In view of the conflicting orders passed by the coordinate benches of the tribunal, on the issue regarding grant of arrears of disability pension beyond a period of three years, the same was referred for consideration to the larger bench of the tribunal. The full bench of the tribunal by an order dated 01.12.2017, inter alia held that the decision of this Court in Union of India and Others v. Ram Avtar (supra) is a judgment in rem and denial of arrears of disability pension amounts to deprivation of property. It was further held that disability pension is a recurring right and the right to claim the same cannot be denied either on the ground of limitation or delay or laches. It was also held that Section 22 of the Act does not apply to the fact situation of the case. Accordingly, the reference was answered.
5. The grievance of the Union of India in the appeals filed by it, is confined only to the direction to make payment of arrears of disability pension with effect from 01.01.1996 or 01.01.2006, as the case may be, without restriction of any time limit to claim arrears of disability pension. The ex-servicemen in their Civil Appeals claim the benefit of arrears of disability pension from the date of their retirement/discharge.
(iii) SUBMISSIONS
6. The learned Attorney General, appearing on behalf of the Union of India, submitted that the grievance of the Union is confined to the direction to pay arrears of disability pension beyond a period of three years. It was contended that claims for arrears of disability pension are governed by the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, as well as Section 22 of the Act, and that even in cases of continuing wrong, arrears cannot extend beyond the prescribed period of limitation. In support of the aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on the decisions of this Court. [Shri Madhav Laxman Vaikunthe v. State of Mysore, AIR 1962 SC 8; Anand Swarup Singh v. State of Punjab, (1972) 4 SCC 744; P.L. Shah v. Union of India and Another, (1989) 1 SCC 546; M.R. Gupta v. Union of India and Others, (1995) 5 SCC 628; Shiv Dass v. Union of India and Others, (2007) 9 SCC 274; Union of India and Others v. Tarsem Singh, (2008) 8 SCC 648; M. Siddiq (Ram Janmabhumi Temple Case) v. Mahant Su
(1) Disability Pension – Right to receive disability pension is a valuable right and once found due, benefit of same has to be given from the date it became due – Same cannot be curtailed by restrict....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
