1. Personnel of the defence security corps seek condonation of service shortfalls to meet the fifteen-year qualifying service requirement for their second service pension eligibility under army pension regulations. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 17 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(SC) 312
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MANOJ MISRA, MANMOHAN, JJ.
Union of India & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Balakrishnan Mullikote (EX HAV 256812 M) – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3708 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 27246 of 2023) With Civil Appeal No. 3709 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 10617/2018) Civil Appeal No. 3710 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 38229/2018) Civil Appeal No. 5199 OF 2023 Civil Appeal No. 3711 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 30477/2023) Civil Appeal No. 3712 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 48314/2023) Civil Appeal No. 3713 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 1818/2024) Civil Appeal No. 3714 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 27725/2024) Civil Appeal No. 3715 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 11632/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3716 of 2026 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 32319/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3717 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 32321/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3718 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 33255/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3719 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 32320/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3720 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 32795/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3721 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 33679/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3722 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 34652/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3723 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 34253/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3724 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 57276/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3725 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 58071/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3726 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 59355/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3727 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 62611/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3728 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 58829/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3729 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 60221/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3730 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 62330/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3731 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 63679/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3732 of 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 64995/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3733 OF 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 38559/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3734 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 64337/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3735 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 62372/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3736 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 65005/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3737 OF 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 510/2026) Civil Appeal No. 3738 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 69413/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3739 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 65163/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3740 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 69726/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3741 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 70272/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3742 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 60220/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3743 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 62616/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3744 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 69755/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3745 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 69735/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3746 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 73216/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3747 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 64998/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3748 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 60026/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3749 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 73198/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3750 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 73265/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3751 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 73886/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3752 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 64456/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3753 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s).73224/2025) Civil Appeal No. 3754 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s).65002 /2025) Civil Appeal No. 3755 OF 2026 (Arising out of Diary No(s). 69733 /2025)
Decided On : 24-03-2026
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, A.S.G. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G. Mr. Abhishek Jain, Adv. Ms. Sweksha, Adv. Mr. Pramod Vishnoi, Adv. Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Kamal Digpaul, Adv. Mr. K Parameshwaran, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Ruchi Kohali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, Adv. Ms. Vaishnav Kirti Singh, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Ankita Chaudhary Rathi, Adv. Ms. Divya Jyoti Singh, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki, Adv. Ms. Harshita Choubey, Adv. Mr. T.S.Sabrish, Adv. Ms. Ankita Chodhary Rathi, Adv. Ms. Shreya Jain, Adv. Mr. Kamal Rattan Digpaul, Adv. Mr. Sunit Choudhary, Adv. Mrs. Chitrangda Rastaravara, Adv. Mr. Advitya Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mishra, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kuamr Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Udit Dedhiya, Adv. Mrs. Megha Karanwala, Adv. Ms. Shivika Mehra, Adv. Mr. Bhakti Vardhan Singh, Adv. Mr. Jagdsih Chandra, Adv. Mr. Mohan Prasad Gupta, Adv. Mr. M.p. Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sridhar Potaraju, Adv. Ms. Astha Singh, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Tyagi, Adv. Mrs. Astha Singh, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Neelakshi Bhadauria, Adv. Mr. Aditya Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Rohit Pandey, Adv. Mr. Prasanjeet Mahapatra, Adv. Mrs. Alka Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ishaan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Sthavi Asthana, Adv. Mr. Sayooj Mohandas, Adv. Mr. M.P Gupta, Adv. Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv. Mr. Gaurang, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv. Ms. Seema Bengani, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samatray, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Ms. Preeti Rani, Adv. Mr. Advitiya Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Kamal Digpaul, Adv. Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Shudhanshu S Pandey, Adv. Mr. Devendra Kumar, Adv. Mr. Raj Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ravi Kumar, Adv. Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Rabin Majumder, AOR Ms. Mousumi Roy, Adv. Mr. Joydeep Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Dusmanta Kumar Pradhan, Adv. Mr. Shivam Majhi, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Mehley, AOR Mr. Mohan Raj, Adv. Ms. Charulata Chaudhary, AOR Mr. Tansukh Rai, Adv. Ms. Shaily Jain, Adv. Mr. Jaswant Singh Rawat, AOR Mr. Banvendra Singh Gandhar, Adv. Ms. Simran Singh Parihar, Adv. Mr. Sohaib Alam, Adv. Mr. Ranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhaya Nath Das, Adv. Mr. Mohd Yasin, Adv. Ms. Monica Goel, Adv. Mr. Nitish Pande, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Udaipuria, Adv. Ms. Mahesh Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sonika Gill, Adv. Mr. Abhinav, Adv. Ms. Sitara Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sarita Verma, Adv. Mr. Satish Hooda, Adv. Mr. Gourav Dixit, Adv. Mr. Satish Kumar, AOR Ms. Jagrati Singh, AOR Ms. Archana Ramesh, Adv. Mr. Rajpal, Adv. Mr. Surendar Kumar, Adv. Mr. Omprakash, Adv. Mr. R. S. Meena, Adv. Mr. Sonu, Adv. Mr. Jaswant Singh Rawat, AOR Mr. Prabhash Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Ajeet Yadav, Adv. Mr. M. Arifi, Adv. Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv. Mr. Davender Rawat, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Upadhayay, Adv.
For the Appellant(s) : Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, A.S.G. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G. Mr. Abhishek Jain, Adv. Ms. Sweksha, Adv. Mr. Pramod Vishnoi, Adv. Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Kamal Digpaul, Adv. Mr. K Parameshwaran, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Ruchi Kohali, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, Adv. Ms. Vaishnav Kirti Singh, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Ankita Chaudhary Rathi, Adv. Ms. Divya Jyoti Singh, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki, Adv. Ms. Harshita Choubey, Adv. Mr. T.S.Sabrish, Adv. Ms. Ankita Chodhary Rathi, Adv. Ms. Shreya Jain, Adv. Mr. Kamal Rattan Digpaul, Adv. Mr. Sunit Choudhary, Adv. Mrs. Chitrangda Rastaravara, Adv. Mr. Advitya Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mishra, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kuamr Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Udit Dedhiya, Adv. Mrs. Megha Karanwala, Adv. Ms. Shivika Mehra, Adv. Mr. Bhakti Vardhan Singh, Adv. Mr. Jagdsih Chandra, Adv. Mr. Mohan Prasad Gupta, Adv. Mr. M.p. Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sridhar Potaraju, Adv. Ms. Astha Singh, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Tyagi, Adv. Mrs. Astha Singh, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Neelakshi Bhadauria, Adv. Mr. Aditya Kashyap, Adv. Mr. Rohit Pandey, Adv. Mr. Prasanjeet Mahapatra, Adv. Mrs. Alka Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ishaan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ishan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Sthavi Asthana, Adv. Mr. Sayooj Mohandas, Adv. Mr. M.P Gupta, Adv. Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv. Mr. Gaurang, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv. Ms. Seema Bengani, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samatray, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Ms. Preeti Rani, Adv. Mr. Advitiya Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Kamal Digpaul, Adv. Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Shudhanshu S Pandey, Adv. Mr. Devendra Kumar, Adv. Mr. Raj Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ravi Kumar, Adv. Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Rabin Majumder, AOR Ms. Mousumi Roy, Adv. Mr. Joydeep Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Dusmanta Kumar Pradhan, Adv. Mr. Shivam Majhi, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Mehley, AOR Mr. Mohan Raj, Adv. Ms. Charulata Chaudhary, AOR Mr. Tansukh Rai, Adv. Ms. Shaily Jain, Adv. Mr. Jaswant Singh Rawat, AOR Mr. Banvendra Singh Gandhar, Adv. Ms. Simran Singh Parihar, Adv. Mr. Sohaib Alam, Adv. Mr. Ranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhaya Nath Das, Adv. Mr. Mohd Yasin, Adv. Ms. Monica Goel, Adv. Mr. Nitish Pande, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Udaipuria, Adv. Ms. Mahesh Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sonika Gill, Adv. Mr. Abhinav, Adv. Ms. Sitara Yadav, Adv. Ms. Sarita Verma, Adv. Mr. Satish Hooda, Adv. Mr. Gourav Dixit, Adv. Mr. Satish Kumar, AOR Ms. Jagrati Singh, AOR Ms. Archana Ramesh, Adv. Mr. Rajpal, Adv. Mr. Surendar Kumar, Adv. Mr. Omprakash, Adv. Mr. R. S. Meena, Adv. Mr. Sonu, Adv. Mr. Jaswant Singh Rawat, AOR Mr. Prabhash Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Ajeet Yadav, Adv. Mr. M. Arifi, Adv. Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv. Mr. Davender Rawat, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Upadhayay, Adv.
Important Points
Defence Security Corps personnel are entitled to condonation of service shortfall for pension eligibility under the same provisions applicable to Regular Army personnel, irrespective of specific interpretations imposed through governmental letters.
Subject
Pension Law - Military Pension Regulations
Act Referred
ARMY ACT: S.3
ARMY RULES: R.187(1)(r)
PENSION REGULATIONS: Para.125, Para.173, Para.44, Para.47, Para.75(a)(i)
ARMY RULES: R.187(1)(r)
PENSION REGULATIONS: Para.125, Para.173, Para.44, Para.47, Para.75(a)(i)
Headnote
(A) Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 and 2008 - Paragraphs 9, 18, 125 and 44 - Eligibility for second service pension - Court examined whether DSC personnel can seek condonation of shortfall in qualifying service - Emphasized that pensionary provisions applicable to Regular Army extend to DSC personnel unless specific provisions are inconsistent - Ruling that amalgamation of past military service not necessary for pension - Governed by regulations, the Ministry of Defence letters cannot amend existing regulations. (Paras 47, 48, 51)
(B) Defence Security Corps - Treatment of personnel and their pensionary benefits - The court affirmed the right of DSC personnel to condonation of service shortfalls just like their regular army counterparts. (Paras 33, 36)
(C) Condonation of service - Court clarified, the intention behind regulatory provisions allows for condonation of shortfall for eligibility to a second service pension. (Paras 12, 40, 51)
Facts of the case:
The appeals involve individuals from the Defence Security Corps seeking second service pensions, which were denied on grounds of insufficient qualifying service; the case centers on the interpretation of applicable pension regulations and their application to the DSC personnel.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld that provisions for the condonation of shortfall in service apply to DSC personnel and reinforced that letters from the Ministry cannot override established pension regulations.
Issues: The court addressed whether the Union of India is bound to give effect to specific pension regulations and whether personnel can seek condonation of service shortfalls for pension eligibility.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the existing pension regulations provide for the condonation of service deficiencies up to 12 months regardless of differing provisions for DSC personnel, emphasizing that all personnel should be treated equitably in terms of their pension rights.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
(B) Defence Security Corps - Treatment of personnel and their pensionary benefits - The court affirmed the right of DSC personnel to condonation of service shortfalls just like their regular army counterparts. (Paras 33, 36)
(C) Condonation of service - Court clarified, the intention behind regulatory provisions allows for condonation of shortfall for eligibility to a second service pension. (Paras 12, 40, 51)
Facts of the case:
The appeals involve individuals from the Defence Security Corps seeking second service pensions, which were denied on grounds of insufficient qualifying service; the case centers on the interpretation of applicable pension regulations and their application to the DSC personnel.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld that provisions for the condonation of shortfall in service apply to DSC personnel and reinforced that letters from the Ministry cannot override established pension regulations.
Issues: The court addressed whether the Union of India is bound to give effect to specific pension regulations and whether personnel can seek condonation of service shortfalls for pension eligibility.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the existing pension regulations provide for the condonation of service deficiencies up to 12 months regardless of differing provisions for DSC personnel, emphasizing that all personnel should be treated equitably in terms of their pension rights.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. The central dispute concerns whether DSC personnel are entitled to the condonation of service shortfalls up to one year to secure second pension eligibility, contrary to executive administrative letters. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 25 )
3. The court observed that DSC personnel are governed by the same pensionary regulations as regular army personnel, and administrative orders cannot override clear, pre-existing statutory pension regulations. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 34 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 49 , 50 )
4. Pensionary provisions applicable to regular army personnel extend to DSC personnel, and executive letters cannot curtail or negate express statutory regulations regarding the condonation of qualifying service shortfalls. (Para 30 , 34 , 41 , 42 )
5. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the entitlement of DSC personnel to condonation of service shortfalls up to one year in accordance with the relevant army pension regulations. (Para 41 , 47 , 48 , 51 )
6. Are personnel of the Defence Security Corps entitled to condonation of a service shortfall for the purpose of receiving a second service pension?
Yes, DSC personnel are entitled to the same pensionary benefits as regular army personnel, including the condonation of service shortfalls of up to one year, as the regulations do not contain a specific prohibition against such condonation for the second spell of service. (Para 33 , 34 , 41 , 48 )
7. Does the requirement to calculate qualifying service allow for the rounding off or treatment of fractionated periods under the regulations?
Yes, in calculating the length of qualifying service, a fraction of a year equal to three months and above but less than six months must be treated as a completed half-year and reckoned as qualifying service, as stipulated in the relevant regulations and government instructions. (Para 31 , 32 , 41 , 47 )
8. Can the government deny pensionary benefits through administrative letters that contradict existing pension regulations?
No, while the government may issue clarifications for ambiguities, it cannot by administrative fiat amend or override clear and categorical provisions of the Pension Regulations that are currently in force. (Para 42 )
JUDGMENT :
MANMOHAN, J.
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave to appeal granted.
3. Applications for intervention / impleadment are allowed.
THE TWO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW
4. The two substantial questions of law that arise for consideration in this batch of appeals are:
A. Whether the Union of India, through the Ministry of Defence, is bound to give effect to Paragraphs 9 and 18 of the PENSION REGULATIONS for the Army, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ PENSION REGULATIONS , 1961’) and PENSION REGULATIONS for the Army, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ PENSION REGULATIONS , 2008’) respectively, as well as Note 5 appended to the letter dated 30th October 1987, while determining the length of qualifying service of personnel serving in the Defence Security Corps (hereinafter referred to as ‘DSC’) and
B. Whether such personnel are entitled to seek condonation of deficiency in the qualifying period of service for the purpose of pension eligibility in accordance with Paragraph 125 of the PENSION REGULATIONS , 1961 and Paragraph 44 of the PENSION REGULATIONS , 2008.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS
5. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, learned Additional Solicitor General of India stated that the present batch of matters fall into two distinct categories: one involving a shortfall in qualifying service of less than one year and the other involving shortfall exceeding one year. She has handed over a chart indicating shortfall in service of each of the Respondents. The relevant portion of the said chart is reproduced hereinbelow:-
| Sl.No. | Case No | Particulars of the individual | QS for Regular Army/First Service | Date of Re Enrollment in DSC | Date of Discharge from DSC | AQS for 2nd Service Pension | Shortfall for 2nd Service Pension |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 (Y/M /D) | 5 | 6 | 7 (Y/M /D) | 8 (Y/M /D) |
| 1 | Diary No 27246 /2023 | Ex Hav Balakrishanan Mullikote | 22/00/02 | 24.08.1994 | 31.05.2008 | 13/09/08 | 01/02/22 |
| 2 | Diary No 10617 /2018 | Ex Nb Sub Ram Chander Disodia | 19/01/18 | 20.09.1983 | 31.05.1997 | 13/08/11 | 01/03 /19 |
| 3 | Diary No 38229 /2018 | Ex Sep Kanshi Ram | 18/06/00 | 22.12.1986 | 29.02.2000 | 13/10/14 | 01/01/16 |
| 4 | Diary No 27300 /2023 | Ex Nk K Boja Rajan | 22/00/00 | 24.03.2006 | 29.02.2020 | 13/11/05 | 01/00/25 |
| 5 | Diary No 30477 /2023 | Ex Nk Govindan Kutty MC | 19/01/13 | 22.12.1999 | 31.11.2013 | 13/11/09 | 01/00/21 |
| 6 | Diary No 48314 /2023 | Ex Nk Daljit Singh | 24/00/02 | 23.04.2007 | 31.01.2021 | 13/09/08 | 01/02/22 |
| 7 | Diary No.1818/2024 | Ex Sub Ved Prakash | 24/00/00 | 26.06.1992 | 31.05.2006 | 13/11/05 | 01/00/25 |
| 8. | SLP(C) 27725 /2024 | Ex NK Chinna Vediyappan & 344 ors | 22/00/06 | 08.07.2003 | 30.09.2017 | 14/02/22 | 00/09/08 |
| 9 | SLP(C)N o.11632/2 025 | Ex Nk Babu Ram | 17/00/00 | 02.08.2006 | 30/06/2021 | 14/10/28 | 00/01/02 |
| 10 | SLP(C) No.32319 /2025 | Ex Nk Shyam Lal | 24/00/00 | 29.02.2008 | 31.07.2022 | 14/05/03 | 00/06/27 |
| 11 | SLP(C) No.32321 /2025 | Ex Hav Mam Raj sharma | 16/03/04 | 10.10.2008 | 29.02.2023 | 14/04/18 | 00/07/12 |
| 12 | SLP(C) No.33255 /2025 | Ex Lnk Jage Ram | 15/00/29 | 03.01.1986 | 31.10.2000 | 14/09/28 | 00/02/02 |
| 13 | SLP(C) No.32320 /2025 | Ex Nk Bhaskar Jankiram Shinde | 16/01/19 | 22.03.2005 | 30.04.2019 | 14/01/09 | 00/10/21 |
| 14 | SLP(C) No.32795 /2025 | Ex Nk Ramesh Singh | 17/00/00 | 06.02.2006 | 30.11.2020 | 14/09/25 | 00/02/05 |
| 15 | SLP(C) No.33679 /2025 | Ex Nk Lekh Raj | 21/04/24 | 10.08.2003 | 01.05.2016 | 14/10/00 | 00/02/00 |
| 16 | SLP(C) No.34652 /2025 | Ex Nk Santosh Kumar Parmanik | 17/00/00 | 30.05.2001 | 29.02.2016 | 14/07/26 | 00/04/04 |
| 17 | SLP(C) No.34253 /2025 | Ex Nk Sher Singh | 17/07/16 | 11.03.2008 | 31.03.2022 | 1400/21 | 01/11/09 |
| 18 | Diary No.57276 /2025 | Ex Sep Randhir | 17/03/03 | 30.04.1984 | 30.11.1998 | 14/07/27 | 00/04/03 |
| 19 | Diary No.58071 /2025 | Ex Hav Madan Mohan Lal | 24/00/03 | 07.05.2009 | 31.01.2024 | 14/08/25 | 00/03/05 |
| 20 | Diary No.59355 /2025 | Ex Nk Bihari Lal | 19/02/24 | ||||
