Supreme Court: The batch of civil appeals under Section 30 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 (the Act) arising out of conflicting decisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal on the period for which arrears of disability pension are payable. While some Benches granted arrears from the applicable cut-off dates, 01-01-1996 or 01-01-2006, others restricted arrears to three years preceding the filing of the original application. A Division Bench of Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe,* JJ., held the ex-servicemen were entitled to disability pension, including the benefit of broad banding, with effect from 01-01-1996 or 01-01-2006, as applicable and directed the payment of arrears along with interest at 6% per annum. The Court quashed and set aside the orders of the Tribunal restricting arrears to three years.
Factual Matrix
The respondent was enrolled in the Indian Air Force on 30-03-1988 and discharged on 31-03-2008 upon completion of tenure. At discharge, he was assessed with 20% disability attributable to and aggravated by military service and was granted disability pension accordingly.
Following the decision of a three-Judge Bench in Union of India v. Ram Avtar, 2014 SCC OnLine SC 1761, the respondent approached the Tribunal in 2016 seeking “broad banding” of disability pension to 50% along with arrears from the date of discharge. The Tribunal allowed the claim and extended the benefit from the date of superannuation.
In view of conflicting Tribunal decisions regarding limitation and arrears, the issue was referred to a Full Bench of the Tribunal. The Full Bench held that the judgment in Ram Avtar (Supra) was a judgment in rem; disability pension is a recurring right; denial of arrears amounts to deprivation of property; Section 22 of the Act does not bar such claims; and the right cannot be denied on grounds of limitation, delay or laches.
The Union of India challenged the grant of unrestricted arrears. The Union’s grievance was confined to the direction requiring payment of arrears from 01.01.1996 or 01.01.2006, as the case may be, without limiting such arrears to three years prior to the filing of the claim. The ex-servicemen, in their appeals, sought arrears from the date of retirement/discharge.
Moot Point
Whether the benefit of arrears of disability pension can be restricted to three years prior to filing of the original applications before the Armed Forces Tribunal?
Statutory and Policy Background
The entitlement to disability pension flows from the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 and 2008. Instructions dated 31-01-2001 implemented the recommendations of the Fifth Central Pay Commission and introduced “broad banding” of disability percentage.
However, the benefit was initially confined to personnel “invalidated out” of service and denied to those who superannuated with disability. The Tribunal struck down this exclusion in 2010.
In Ram Avtar (Supra), a three-Judge Bench upheld the Tribunal’s view and held that personnel retiring on completion of tenure with disability attributable to or aggravated by military service are also entitled to broad banding. Over 800 appeals filed by the Union were dismissed.
The Government thereafter issued orders dated 15-09-2014 and 18-04-2016 approving implementation of judicial directions and granting arrears from 01-01-1996 or 01-01-2006, as applicable.
Court’s Analysis
Nature of Pension
The Court reiterated the settled principle that “pension is neither a bounty nor an ex gratia payment dependent upon the grace of the State. It is a deferred portion of compensation for past service and, upon fulfilment of the governing conditions, matures into a vested and enforceable right.”
The Court stated that the disability pension, grounded in impairment suffered in service of the nation, “is not a matter of largesse, but a recognition of sacrifice made in service of the nation.” It was stated that pensionary entitlements partake the character of property and cannot be withheld except by authority of law.
Effect of judgment Ram Avtar (Supra)
The Court noted that the legal position regarding broad banding remained uncertain until 10.12.2014. The Court held that the decision in Ram Avtar (Supra) was a judgment in rem. Therefore, its benefit ought to have been extended uniformly to all eligible ex-servicemen. The Union, as a “model employer,” was expected to act with fairness and consistency rather than compel each individual to approach the Tribunal.
Policy Decisions of the Government
The Court emphasised that the Union itself had taken a “conscious policy determination taken with full financial concurrence” to grant arrears from 01-01-1996 or 01-01-2006. Once the State has consciously decided that arrears are payable from a specified cut-off date, it cannot “resile and contend” that arrears must be confined to three years preceding the claim.
The Court asserted that the confining the arrears to three years preceding the claim would amount to “acknowledging the right in principle while denying its substantive content in effect.” Such deprivation would constitute infringement of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India.
Limitation and Section 22
The Court rejected the Union’s reliance on limitation and delay. It was observed that the right to approach the Tribunal accrued only on 10-12-2014 when Ram Avtar (Supra) was decided. The ex-servicemen were already in receipt of disability pension and were merely seeking recomputation. Therefore, the bar under Section 22(1)(c) of the Act had no application and the applications did not suffer from delay or laches. The Court held that objections founded on delay and limitation to be “without any merit.”
The Court further distinguished Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, (2008) 8 SCC 648 and observed that the legal landscape changed after the three-Judge Bench decision in Ram Avtar (Supra) and in any case the present claims concerned recomputation of existing pension.
Court’s Decision
The Court held that ex-servicemen are entitled to disability pension including broad banding from 01-01-1996 or 01-01-2006, as applicable, along with interest at 6% per annum. The Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Union of India, quashed the Tribunal’s orders restricting arrears to three years.
[Union of India v. SGT Girish Kumar, Civil Appeal Nos. 6820-6824 of 2018, Decided on 12-02-2026]
*Judgment by Justice Alok Aradhe
Buy Constitution of India HERE
