http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 14

CASE NO.:

Appeal (civil) 7805 of 1997

PETITIONER:

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

RESPONDENT:

P.O. YADAV

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16/10/2001

BENCH:

B.N. KIRPAL & SHIVARAJ V. PATL & P. VENKATARAMA REDDI

JUDGMENT:

JUDGMENT

2001 Supp(4) SCR 209

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

SHIVARAJ V. PAIL, J. In short the facts leading to filing of these appeals,

are as stated below.

Civil Appeal No. 7805/1997

The respondent here in joined Navy as a Sailor in April, 1965 and was

commissioned in October, 1980. On account of certain alleged misconduct and

irregularities, he was tried by General Court Martial on five charges. He

was found guilty of the charges 2,3,4 and 5 and consequently a penalty of

dismissal from service was imposed on him on 26.2.1990. He was given a

show-cause notice on 21.6.1991 under Regulation 15(2) of the Navy (Pension)

Regula-tions, 1964 as to why his pensionary benefits should not be

forfeited. He sent a reply on 24.7.1991. The appellants informed him on

7.5.1992 that the action will be taken soon pursuant to the show-cause

notice issued. However, without waiting any further, he filed a writ

petition on 20.1.1993 in the High Court. After the filing of the said writ

petition, an order was passed on 28.3.1994 forfeiting 50% of the pensionary

benefits. The High Court partly allowed his writ petition and remanded the

case giving certain directions to the appellants by the order dated

4.3.1997. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the appellants are before this

Court in this appeal.

Civil Appeal No. 7806/1997

The respondent was commissioned in the Indian Army on 30.6.1963 and was due

to retire on 31.3.1989. On 17.2.1988, he was tried by General Court Martial

on certain charges and was dismissed from service on 13.6.1988 under

Section 71 of the Army Act. He submitted papers for payment of pension

stating that he had qualifying service. Since pension was not given to him,

he filed Civil Writ Petition No. 1249/90 in the High Court on 3.3.1990. On

16.4.1991, a show-cause notice was issued under Section 16(a) of the

Pension Regulations of the Army (Part I) proposing forfeiture of pension on

the ground that he was dismissed from service. He submitted reply to the

said show-cause notice. However, the President of India by order dated

22.7.1992 under said Regulation 16(a) forfeited 50% of the pensionary

benefits. He filed Writ Petition No. 2866/90 for amendment of the writ

petition challenging the said order. The High Court by the impugned order

quashed the order dated 22.7.1992 and directed the appellants to reconsider

his case in the light of the directions given in the judgment. Hence this

appeal.

Civil Appeal No. 7807 of 1997

The respondent was commissioned in the Army as Engineer Graduate Officer on

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 2 of 14

11.1.1968. He was tried by General Court Martial on the allegation of

splitting purchase orders for shelters, to bring them within the financial

limits and for making purchases at rates higher than scheduled and

sanctioned rates. After trial by General Court Martial he was cashiered on

11.3.1994 and was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.

He forwarded papers on 29.6.1994 to the authorities for grant of pension.

On 22.2.1995, a show-cause notice was issued to him under Regulation 16(a)

of Army Pension Regulations for forfeiture of pension. He claimed to have

sent a reply to the show cause notice but the order was passed forfeiting

his pensionary benefits stating that he had not sent any reply to the show-

cause notice. The High Court quashed the impugned order forfeiting his

pension and directed the appellants for re-consideration and passing fresh

order. Aggrieved by the said order of the High Court dated 4th March, 1997,

this appeal is filed.

Civil Appeal No. 7808 of 1997

The respondent herein entered Army service and was commissioned on

12.6.1960. He was promoted to Selection Grade rank of Acting Br