Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AFT) 272
ARMED FORCE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR
Goverdhan Bardhar, J, Sanjiv Mittal, Member (A)
Ran Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
OA No 211/2024|MA No 324/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Budh Ram, Dhura Ram
For the Respondents: Anil Bhardwaj
The OROP scheme is a policy reform intended to bridge gaps for past pensioners and does not entitle personnel retiring after its implementation to claim pension parity with pre-implementation retirees, nor does it override distinct service-specific regulations regarding pay and pension fixation.
Headnote:(A) Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 - Section 14 - One Rank One Pension (OROP) scheme - Pension parity - Applicant retired on 31.12.2020 - Claiming stepping up of service pension based on OROP rates implemented before his discharge - Held, OROP scheme implemented w.e.f 01.07.2014 and 01.07.2019 is not applicable to personnel retiring after these dates as they are governed by their last pay drawn - Pension rates for different services like Territorial Army and Regular Army are governed by distinct service rules and tables - Plea for pension revision on day-to-day basis rejected as contrary to policy. (Paras 6, 8, 9)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, an ex-serviceman who retired on 31.12.2020, challenged the fixation of his pension at Rs. 25,050/-. He argued that he was entitled to an anomaly-adjusted pension of Rs. 26,741/-, comparing his pension to those retiring under different periods and to Territorial Army personnel, alleging discrimination under the OROP scheme. His representation for stepping up the pension was rejected by the respondents.
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal held that personnel retiring after the implementation dates of OROP phases are not entitled to claim benefits intended for those who retired prior to those specific cut-off dates. Parity cannot be claimed between the Regular Army and Territorial Army due to their inherently different regulatory frameworks. The OROP scheme is designed for periodic review, not automatic, day-to-day revision.
Issues: Whether an ex-serviceman retiring after the implementation of OROP schemes is entitled to pension parity with those who retired prior to the cut-off dates, and whether pension scales can be equated between the Regular Army and the Territorial Army.
Ratio Decidendi: The principle of OROP focuses on bridging gaps for past pensioners and does not establish a right to automatic, daily pension revision or absolute equality between distinct service categories. Retirement date criteria and specific last-pay-drawn rules validly determine pension quantum.
Result: Original Application dismissed.
30.
ORDER
1. The above Original Application has been filed by the Applicant under the provisions of Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, praying for the following reliefs:
(a) To direct the Respondents to step up service pension of the Applicant to Rs. 26,741/- (10,405x2.57) wef 01.01.2021 or as deemed appropriate to remove anomaly instead of Rs. 25,050/- granted to Havildar ACP-1 (Naib Subedar Grade), Group 'Y' for 26 years service in the interest of natural justice.
(b) The Hon'ble Tribunal may quash any letters or orders to avert in stepping up the service pension of the Applicant wef 01.01.2021 in the interest of natural justice.
(c) The Hon'ble Tribunal may pass any such other and further order or orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the Applicant was enrolled in the Army on 28.12.1994 and after rendering more than 26 years of service, he was discharged from Service on 31.12.2020 in the rank of Havildar (ACP-1) (Group Y), for which he has been granted Service Pension @ Rs. 25,050/- pm wef 01.01.2021 vide PPO No 157202008035 suffix 0101. The Govt of India, Ministry of Defence vide letter No 12(1)/2014/D (Pen/Pol)- Part II dt 07.11.2015 has implemented "One Rank One Pension" (OROP) for Armed Forces personnel wef 01.07.2014 which implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces personnel retiring in the same rank with same length of service regardless of their date of retirement, thereby bridging the gap between the rates of pension of the current and the past pensioners at periodical intervals. However, the PCDA (P) has changed the definition itself stating that "who were/are in receipt of retiring pension/service pension/ service element of disability pension, invalid pension as on 01.07.2014". The Applicant submits that the word pre 01.07.2014 used by the PCDA (P) is ultra vires in the policy of the Respondents for non-granting the pension to the Applicant, ie., equal to same rank with same length of service as per principles of OROP as envisaged in MoD letter No 12(1)/2014/D(Pen/Pol) Part-II dt 07.11.2015. Govt of India, Ministry of Defence vide their letter No 17(1)/2016 D(Pen/Pol) dt 29.10.2016 under the 7th CPC, existing pensioners who have pension/died before 01.01.2016, the revised pension/family pension wef 01.01.2016 shall be determined by multiplying the basic pension before commutation as had been drawn as on 31.12.2015 by 2.57 to arrive at the revised pension. Hence, the pension of pre-2016 (ie. Retired before 01.07.2014) is Rs. 26,741/- for 26 years qualifying service (Group Y) under 3rd MACP (Nb Sub Grade), whereas the Applicant has been granted Service Pension @ Rs. 25,050/-, which has created anomaly in the instant case. Further, Govt of India, Ministry of Defence has put no bar to issue suo-moto Corrigendum PPOs notionally pay fixation as done in 6th CPC to remove the anomaly in pension of pre-2006 and post-2006 vide MoD letter No 14(4)/08/(2) (Pen/Policy) dt 18.08.2010 as circulated vide PCDA (P) Circular No 471 dt 30.09.2011. Further, on implementation of 7th CPC wef 01.01.2016, the pay and pension has to be revised/determined by applying the formula of fitment factor, ie., multiplication factor of 2.57 with existing pay/pension and pay matrix system as on 31.12.2015 in terms of PCDA (P) Circular No 570 dt 31.10.2016. The Applicant further submits that notional pay should be taken into account for all post-2006 retirees wef 01.01.2006 and after grant of regular annual increments, the pay should be calculated after application of multiplication factor 2.57 in the existing pay as on 31.12.2015. The Applicant has placed reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of DS Nakara & Ors Vs UOI, (1983) 1 SCC 305 and submitted that all the pensioners form one class and, hence, the distinction between the retirees of pre and post of a specific date is arb
