COURT NO. 1, ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI 9. OA 94/2023 In the matter of: Ex Nk/DSC Lal Singh ... Applicant Versus Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents For Applicant : ShriJ.P. Sharma, Advocate For Respondents: Shri Sudhir Kumar, Advocate CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA MENON, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE LT GEN C.P. MOHANTY, MEMBER (A) ORDER 18.01.2023 By means of the present OA, the applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, praying for grant of second service pension for the service rendered by him in Defence Security Corps (DSC), which was denied by the respondents on the ground of not having completed the mandatory qualifying service of 15 years to make him eligible for the said pension. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 03.10.1983 and discharged from service on 31.10.2005 after completion of pensionable _ service. Thereafter, he was re-enrolled in the DSC of the Army onThereafter, he was re-enrolled in the DSC of the Army on 28.08.2007 and was discharged from that service on 31.05.2022 after rendering 14 years, 09 months and 03 days of service in DSC. Hence, there is a shortfall of 02 months and 28 days (total 89 days) to complete 15 years of qualifying service to become eligible for second service pension in DSC. 3. With regard to prayer for grant of second service pension in DSC, it may be noticed that the applicant has been denied pension for the spell of service in DSC on the ground that he has not completed the minimum required qualifying service of 15 years. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant relied on Rule 125 of the Pension Regulations for the Army as per which, shortfall in qualifying service for the grant of pensionary benefits in respect of personnel below officer rank (PBOR) upto 12 months can be condoned by the competent authority to earn service pension. He further submitted that the same issue was also decided by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in its judgment dated 07.11.2013 in O.A, No. 60 of 2013 in the matter of Bhani Devi Vs. Union ofIndia & Ors. as well as in its judgment dated 14.08.2014 o O.A. No. 80 of 2014. 5, Heard the submissions of the counsel for both th parties and also perused the documents placed on record. 6. Although the learned counsel for the respondents doe not dispute the fact about the re-enrollment of the applicant i DSC on 28.08.2007 and discharge from service on 31.05.202' after completing 14 years, 09 months and 03 days of service i DSC, however, he has no objections to issuing appropriat orders, subject to verification of records. 7. The issue involved in this case is no longer res integrc as the same had already been settled by this Tribunal in th cases of Bhani Devi (supra), Ex Nk Vijay Singh Vs. Union c India _and_ others [O.A. No. 272 of 2018 decided o 14.10.2020] and the Kochi Bench of this Tribunal in Ex N Mohanan T. Vs. Union of India and others [O.A. No. 131 ¢ 2017 decided on 12.10.2017]. In Bhani Devi’s case (supra), was held that the provisions for condonation of shortfall 1 service under Regulation 125 of the Pension Regulations fc the Army, 1961 (Part-I) are equally applicable to armed forcesecond service pension. Against the order in Ex Nk Mohanan T. (supra), granting condonation of shortfall of DSC service, subsequent to issue of Government of India (Ministry of Defence) letter dated 20.06.2017, the respondents had approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing Civil Appeal (Diary) No. 27100 of 2018, which was dismissed vide order dated 27.08.2018 and thus the matter has attained finality. In Ex Nk Vijay Singh (supra), while referring to the Full Bench decision of this Tribunal in Smt. Shama Kaur Vs. Union of India & others etc. etc. (0.A. No. 1238 of 2016 etc. etc.) passed on 01.10.2019, which dealt with the question as to whether there should be condonation of deficiency of service for grant of