The court upheld the Tribunal's authority to condone a service shortfall for pension eligibility under prevailing regulations and precedents.

JUDGMENT

The petitioners have filed the writ petition challenging Ext. P1 order dated 26.09.2022 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi, condoning the shortfall of 1 year, 2 months in completing 15 years of qualifying service for pension in Defence Security Corps (DSC) by the respondent and consequently making him eligible for grant of second service pension.

2. It is submitted that the Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction against the policy issued by the Union of India and has failed to appreciate that Union of India, as per its Policy letter No. 14(02)/2011-D (Pen/Pol) dated 20.06.2017, has in clear and categorical terms stated that no condonation shall be allowed for grant of second service pension. The relevant portion of the said letter dated 20.06.2017 is as follows:

“3. It is conveyed that the intention behind condonation of deficiency in service for grant of service pension is that the individual must not be left high & dry but should made eligible for at least one service pension. In view of above, it is clarified that no condonation shall be allowed for grant of second service pension.”

3. It is also submitted that it is an explicit position from the records that the petitioner is drawing his first service pension and therefore, in the light of the letter dated 20.06.2017, the respondent cannot be granted the benefit of condonation of shortfall for the purpose of second service pension. The letter dated 20.06.2017 makes it clear that grant of condonation of deficiency in qualifying service is to be accorded only in deserving cases to make the individual eligible for at least one service pension, and that condonation of deficiency in qualifying service for grant of second service pension in respect of DSC personnel has no merit. Therefore, in terms of the policy enacted for grant of pension to ex-servicemen, there was no question of condonation of deficiency in qualifying service for grant of second service pension, it is contended.

4. Central Government Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in “ Union of India v. Air Commodore NK Sharma [2023 SCC Online SC 1673] and argued that the Tribunal which is a quasi judicial body is bound to function within the strict boundaries of the governing legislation and cannot direct making/altering of a Government policy.

5. We have heard the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent.

6. The issue involved in this case is whether the shortfall in the second service rendered by the petitioner in the DSC can be condoned or not, for the purpose of claiming pension. It is an admitted position that the very same issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Union of India & Ors. v. Balakrishnan Mullikote (Ex Hav 256812 M) [2026 SCC OnLine SC 464], in which it is held as follows:

“47. This Court is of the view that Union of India through the Ministry of Defence shall determine the length of qualifying services in accordance with Paragraphs 9 and 18 of the Pension Regulations, of 1961 and 2008 respectively, as well as Note 5 appended to the letter dated 30^th October

1987.

48. If, upon determination of the length of qualifying service, there remains a shortfall of one year or less, the Respondents shall be entitled to seek condonation of such deficiency for the purpose of pension eligibility, in accordance with Paragraph 125 of the Pension Regulations, 1961 or Paragraph 44 of the Pension Regulations, 2008. This position has already been affirmed by this Court in Surender Singh Parmar (supra). The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:—

“3. The factual matrix of the case is as follows : the respondent