CWP-15497-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

120 CWP-15497-2026 Date of Decision : May 18, 2026 Union of India and others .. Petitioners Versus No.14305087L Ex. HAV Om Prakash and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Present: Mr. Saksham Parmar, Advocate, for the petitioners.

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)

1. In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the impugned order dated 20.10.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.2-Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) by which, respondent No.1 has been allowed the benefit of rounding off of the disability element of disability pension @ 50% as against 20% w.e.f. 01.01.1996 on the same terms as in Civil Appeal No.418 of 2022 (Union of India and others Vs. Ram Avtar), decided on 10.12.2014

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon the report of medical examination of respondent No.1 to contend that though the disability of “Bronchial Asthma” as assessed @ 20% has been found in respondent No.1, but he has been discharged from service on 01.12.1992 in low medical category on completion of his terms of engagement under Army Rules. Hence, the grant of benefit of rounding off of the disability element @ 50% as against 20% w.e.f. 01.01.1996 by placing reliance upon the judgment of in Civil Appeal No.5591-2006 titled as KJS Buttar vs. Union Union of India and others vs. Ram Avtar, decided on 10.12.2014 is incorrect and the facts of the present case have not been appreciated in correct perspective by the Tribunal while passing the impugned order dated 20.10.2023 (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel for the petitioners has further argued that the benefit of arrears granted to respondent No.1, in pursuance to granting the benefit of rounding off disability pension from 20% to 50%, which has been granted to respondent No.1 for whole of the intervening period, is incorrect in view of the judgment in Shiv Dass vs. Union of India and others, (2007) 9 SCC 274, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explicitly settled that where a claim is raised after a delay, Courts are to restrict the benefit of arrears to 03 years preceding the filing of the Original Application hence, the grant of disability pension with arrears for whole of the intervening period, is incorrect.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the case file with his able assistance.

4. It is conceded fact that at the time when respondent No.1 was discharged from service on 01.12.1992 on completion of his terms of engagement under Army Rules, he had already rendered around 22 years of service with the petitioners-Union of India. It is also a conceded fact that at the time when respondent No. 1 joined the armed forces i.e. 18.11.1970, he was medically examined and was not found suffering from any such disease. 5. The issue in the present case is only with regard to grant of benefit of rounding off from the year 1996, to which, learned counsel for the petitioners has raised an objection. The said issue is no longer res integra as the said issue qua grant of arrears to the army personnel, which issue has been in dispute somewhat, has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

CWP-15497-2026 3

of India in a recently passed judgment in

2018 titled as Union of India through Secretary and others vs. SGT Girish Kumar and others, decided on 12.02.2026, whereby the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that " pensionary entitlements partake the character of property and same is neither a bounty nor ex-gratia payment and same cannot be withheld, reduced or extinguished except by authority of law. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has further held that UOI has taken a conscious policy decision so as to grant benefit of arrears of disability pension to all eligible ex-servicemen from 01.01.1996 or 01.01.2006 as the case may be, which is clear from para 2 of letter d