##PAGE1##

(cid:1)

(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:3)(cid:1)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:3)(cid:10)(cid:6)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:13)

(cid:1)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:3)(cid:10)(cid:6)(cid:10)(cid:11)

(cid:1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

(124+255) CM-13307-CWP-2026; in/and CWP-15495-2026

Date of Decision : 17.08.2026

Ranjit Kaur ...Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and Others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL

Present: Mr. Ujwal Anand, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Neha Jain, Senior Panel Counsel, for the respondents-Union of India.

***

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

CM-13307-LPA-2026

1. This is an application filed under Article 151 of the Code of

Civil Procedure for placing on record the reply along with Annexures.

2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the reply along with Annexures, is taken on record, subject to

all just exceptions.

3. Application stands disposed of accordingly.

CWP-15495-2026

1. The present petition has been filed against the order dated 21.08.2019 (Annexure P-3), passed by learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in MA Nos.1737 &

SHUBHAM

2026.08.25 11:38 I am the author of this document (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:2)(cid:2) (cid:3) (cid:4)(cid:5) (cid:2)

(cid:1)

(cid:1)

(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:3)(cid:1)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:3)(cid:10)(cid:6)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:13)

(cid:1)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:3)(cid:10)(cid:6)(cid:10)(cid:11)

(cid:1)

1738 of 2019 and OA No.1856 of 2017, by which, the arrears of war injury pension have been restricted to a period of three years preceding the filing of the original application, so as to claim the total arrears admissible from the

date of entitlement for the war injury pension.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner argues that husband of the petitioner suffered a war injury while he was posted during the 1971 Indo-Pak war and he suffered a shell wound injury on his left face, which resulted in “Hypermetropic Astigmatism Lt Eye”. The said injury has been held to be attributable to the Military service however, the benefit of war injury pension was not extended to him despite the injury has been suffered during the 1971 war with Pakistan. Learned counsel submits that the benefit of war injury pension was available even at the relevant point of time as well and should have been extended by the respondent-State especially when the facts were not in dispute and therefore, though the benefit of war injury pension has subsequently been extended on the basis of the claim made by the petitioner but the arrears have been restricted to a period of three years, which is incorrect, in view the law settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as 'Balbir Singh Vs. Union of India and Others’ in Civil Appeal No. 3086 of 2012 decided on 08.04.2016, as well as in Civil Appeal Nos. 6820-6824 of 2018 titled as ‘Union of India through Secretary and others vs. SGT Girish Kumar and others’, decided on 12.02.2026, the benefit of arrears cannot be restricted and the petitioner

cannot be allowed to take the benefit of their own wrong.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to dispute the aforesaid factual position; however, it is submitted that the petitioner or

SHUBHAM

2026.08.25 11:38 I am the author of this document (cid:4)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:2)(cid:2) (cid:3) (cid:4)(cid:5) (cid:2)

(cid:1)

(cid:1)

(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:3)(cid:1)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:3)(cid:10)(cid:6)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:15)(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:13)

(cid:1)(cid:8)(cid:9)