THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.21234 AND 21235 OF 2025

COMMON ORDER:

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)

Since the issue involved in both these Writ Petitions is one and the same, both these Writ Petitions are being heard together and disposed of by way of this common order.

2. W.P.No.21234 of 2025 is filed aggrieved by the order, dated 16.11.2022, passed in O.A.No.200 of 2020 with M.A.No.181 of 2020 by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chennai, Circuit Bench at Hyderabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’).

3. W.P.No.21235 of 2025 is filed aggrieved by the order, dated 13.10.2022, passed in O.A.No.119 of 2022 with M.A.No.187 of 2022 by the Tribunal.

4. Heard Sri G.R.S. Akhileswar, learned counsel representing the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for the petitioners.

5. For the sake of convenience, the facts in W.P.No.21234 of 2025 are hereunder discussed.

6. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent was enrolled with the Indian Army on 17.03.1976 as Army Medical Corps and he was discharged from service on 31.03.1993, after putting in qualifying service of 17 years 15 days. As per Army Rules, he was granted service pension. Later, the respondent was re-enrolled by way of secondment as Defence Security Corps on 03.01.1998 and was discharged from service of secondment assignment on 31.12.2012. He was falling short of 3 days to become eligible for secondment pension. As admittedly, the respondent has not completed 15 years of service in the Defence Security Corps, secondment pension was not granted to him. In those set of circumstances, the respondent has approached the Tribunal by filing the subject O.A.No.200 of 2020. The Tribunal vide impugned order, dated 16.11.2022, was pleased to allow the subject O.A. and directed the petitioners to pay secondment pension to the respondent, without appreciating the fact that the respondent has not completed

15 years of service.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn our attention to the proceedings, dated 23.04.2012 and 20.06.2017, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence, wherein it was decided that secondment pension cannot be granted without completing 15 years of service. Learned counsel had contended that these proceedings were not properly appreciated by the Tribunal and the Tribunal has mechanically allowed the subject O.As. in favor of the respondents. Learned counsel further contended that when the respondents have not completed 15 years of service, the question of granting secondment pension to them would not arise.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended that the facts in both the Writ Petitions are one and the same. The only difference in both the cases is that the respondent in W.P.No.21234 of 2025 is falling short of 3 days and the respondent in W.P.No.21235 of 2025 is falling short of 78 days of qualifying service of 15 years. The Tribunal has not appreciated the said fact and allowed the subject O.As. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in both the Writ Petitions by setting aside the impugned orders, dated 16.11.2022 and 13.10.2022, and allow the Writ Petitions.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended that the respondents have approached the Tribunal with a delay of more than eight years and the Tribunal without assigning any reason has condoned the delay with a single line order stating that the delay in filing the O.As. is condoned. The Tribunal ought to have examined the cases of the respondents and after being satisfied that each day delay has been properly explained, ought to have condoned the delay. Admittedly, in the instant cases, the respondents have not given any cogent reasons for approaching the Tribunal belatedly. Therefore, on this count also, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.

10. This Court, having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for