The entitlement to Special Family Pension commences from the date of the spouse's death, emphasizing constitutional rights and the obligation to process pension claims without delay.

1. This writ petition assails the order dated 31 July 2023, passed by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal1 in OA 672/20202.

1 “the Tribunal” hereinafter

2 Smt Guddi Bisht v Union of India and others.

3 “Puran” hereinafter

2. The respondent Guddi Bisht is the widow of one Havaldar Puran Chandra Singh Bisht3. Puran was enrolled in the Indian Army on 5 August 1965. Consequent to the death of his first wife, Puran married the respondent on 1 May 1977. The Tribunal has recorded, in the impugned order, and it is not in dispute before us, that, consequent on the marriage of Puran with the respondent, the respondent’s name

was recorded in the service records of Puran as his legal heir for the purposes of receipt of family pension.

3. On 29 April 1978, Puran died, following an electric shock. A Court of Inquiry4 was constituted to enquire into the cause of death. The COI, in its report dated 12 October 1978, clearly opined that the death of Puran was attributable to military service.

4 “COI” hereinafter

4. Ordinarily, this should have sufficed for Special Family Pension to have been released to the respondent. The respondent duly applied for grant of Special Family Pension. The application was forwarded to the Pension Sanctioning Authority on 13 November 1978.

5. Strangely, the Pension Sanctioning Authority, on 5 March 1979 rejected the respondent’s claim for Special Family Pension on the ground that the death of Puran was not attributable to military service. We fail to understand how such a conclusion could have been arrived at, in the face of the finding, to the contrary, of the COI.

6. Be that as it may, the decision of the Pension Sanctioning Authority was communicated to the respondent on 16 March 1979. The communication also informed her that she had a right to appeal against the decision within six months. It is not in dispute that the respondent did not prefer any such appeal.

7. Following the aforesaid decision of the Pension Sanctioning Authority, the respondent was granted ordinary family pension on 6 July 1979, and continued to be paid ordinary family pension thereafter.

8. On 3 August 2015, the respondent applied for grant of Special Family Pension. The petitioner, by communication dated 26 September 2015, advised the respondent to submit an appeal against the decision of the Pension Sanctioning Authority to the First Appellate Authority. The respondent appealed on 12 October 2015. The First Appellate Authority allowed the appeal. On the basis of the decision of the First Appellate Authority, the respondent was granted Special Family Pension. However, this grant was only made effective from 12 October 2015.

9. The respondent, in these circumstances, petitioned the Tribunal by way of OA 672/2020, praying for arrears of Special Family Pension, from the date of the death of her husband, i.e., for the period 30 April 1978 to 11 October 2015 with interest.

10. The application was contested by the petitioner, as the respondent before the Tribunal, on the ground that it was highly belated.

11. The Tribunal has, however, proceeded to grant arrears as sought

by the respondent. The reasoning of the Tribunal is contained in the following paras of the order:

“10. That the applicant is entitled to the Special Family Pension, in view of the death of her late husband Hav Puran Chandra Singh Bisht who died due to an electric shook during repair of an electric board in the unit lines whilst he was on bonafide military duty and thus entitled to the grant of Special Family Pension is not disputed, is an established fact in as much as the cause of de