SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AFT) 18

ARMED FORCE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR
Shri Govind Singh So Late Smt Phool Bai wdo Late HavCook Pooran SinghUOI & Others



ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, JAIPUR S/2.

TA No 22/ 2013 (CW 7277/ 2007)

Smt Phool Bai (deceased), Wd/o Late Pooran Singh, Through LR Govind Singh (Son), R/o Vill-Baragaon, Post-Karana, District-Alwar (Raj) …. Applicant Versus

1. The Union of India, through Secretary to the Govt of India, Ministry of Defence,New Delhi – 110011

2. The PCDA (P),Allahabad(UP) -211014

3. The OIC, Records The Grenadiers Regiment …. Respondents Jabalpur (MP)

For Applicant : Mr RS Bhadauria, Advocate For Respondents : Mr Anil Bhardwaj, Advocate CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MR SANJIV MITTAL, MEMBER (A)

O R D E R

26.09.2025 Facts of the Case

1. The Original Applicant, Smt Phool Bai, claiming to be widow of Late Pooran Singh had filed SB CWP No 7277/2007 before Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur for grant of Mustering Out Pension for the lifetime of her husband and thereafter Family Pension to the Applicant for life. Upon establishment of this Tribunal, the case was transferred to this Tribunal vide Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Order dt 21.11.2013 and registered with Tribunal as TA No 22/2013. During the pendency of the case, the Original Applicant, Smt Phool Bai expired on 16.11.2016 and Shri Govind Singh, Son of the Original Applicant was taken on record as LR vide this Tribunal Order dt 15.05.2023 subject to verification of facts and filing of objections, if any, by the Respondents.

2. The brief facts of the caseas enunciated by the Original Applicant are that the Original Applicant’s husband was enrolled in Alwar Jay Paltan (Rajasthan State Forces) on 05.08.1942. While in Service, he participated in World War-II and served overseas with MEF from 15.09.1942 to 03.12.1945 which works out to be 3 years and two months. Consequent to reduction in Establishment, he was discharged from Service after rendering 8 years, 9 months and 10 days of service on 15.05.1951. The Applicant submits that in terms of Ministry of Defence letter dt 21.04.1951, the services rendered Ex State in field service areas shall be counted double for purpose of pension and gratuity under the respective State Forces Rules. Since Late Hav/Cook Pooran Singh had rendered 3 years and 2 months service Ex State in Field Area from 15.09.1942 to 03.12.1945 and after counting it as double service, his total service comes to 11 years, 11 months and 10 days (8 year, 9 months, 10 days Regular Service and 3 years and 2 months Ex State Service) in terms of Govt of India, Ministry of Defence Order dt 30.04.1951 as circulated vide HQ Rajasthan State Forces, Jaipur letter No 3/164/G(R) dt 24 May 1951/ 04 July 1951, thereby making him eligible for grant of Mustering Out Pension. The Original Applicant submits that in terms of Rule 316 of Pension Regulations for the Army, 1940 her husband was entitled for grant of Mustering Out Pension. The Applicant, being a rustic villager was unaware of the changed policy entitling him for grant of Mustering Out Pension, did not approach the Competent Authority for grant of Mustering Out Pension during his lifetime and died on 26.02.1998. Further, the Respondents are duty bound to identify such cases which fall within the parameters of policy directives and grant benefits to the due beneficiaries, which the Respondents failed to do. After death of her husband, the Original Applicant made representations and also issued Legal Notice to the Respondents for grant of Mustering Out Pension for lifetime of her husband and thereafter Family Pension to her for life in terms of the changed policies, but to no avail. The Original Applicant has submitted that the similarly placed personnel, ie., No 7322 Sep Ajeet Singh of 2nd Jodhpur Infantry and No 4740 Ex Sep Kan Singh of Rajput Regt have been granted Mustering Out Pension vide PPO Nos 666 M dt 31.01.51 and PPO No 3033 respectively. In support of her claim, the Original Applicant has also placed reliance on Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur judgment dt 20.07.2005 in SB CWP No 7

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top