Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Union Of India And Others vs Gopi Ram And Another on 17 October, 2025

Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi, Vikas Suri

CWP-31227-2025                   1

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH


(121)                            CWP-31227-2025
                                 Date of Decision : October 17, 2025


Union of India and others                                   .. Petitioners


                                 Versus

Ex. HAV Gopi Ram (since deceased) through Smt. Rajvati Devi
and another                                     .. Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI

Present:     Ms. Geeta Singhwal, Senior Panel Counsel,
             for the petitioners-UOI.

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)

1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned order dated 24.07.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.2-Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, (for short, 'the Tribunal') by which, respondent No.1 (since deceased) has been allowed the benefit of arrears by rounding off of the disability element @ 50% as against 30% for the period starting from 01.06.2006 till 17.12.2019.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the case file with her able assistance.

3. It shall be noted that the only grievance which has been raised by the petitioners is qua the grant of benefit of arrears to respondent No.1, by granting the benefit of rounding off to respondent No.1 from 30% to 50% by relying upon judgment of Civil Appeal No.418-2012 titled as Union of India and others vs. Ram Avtar, decided on 10.12.2014.

1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 11-11-2025 10:45:53 ::: CWP-31227-2025 2

4. As per the settled principle of law settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Ram Avtar's case (supra), any officer serving in the Armed Forces, who had undergone the medical examination at the time of his/her selection and was found fit, subsequently upon suffering a disability, is entitled to the benefit of disability pension by rounding off the same as the presumption would be that the disability suffered is attributable to the Military service. Relevant paras of the judgment in Ram Avtar's case (supra) are as under:-

"4. By the present set of appeals the appellant(s) raise the question, whether or not, an individual, who has retired on attaining the age of superannuation or on completion of his tenure of engagement, if found to be suffering from some disability which is attributable to or aggravated by the military service, is entitled to be granted the benefit of rounding-off of disability pension. The appellant(s) herein would contend that, on the basis of Circular No. 1(2)/97/D(Pen-C) issued by the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, dated 31.01.2001, the aforesaid benefit is made available only to an Armed Forces Personnel who is invalidated out of service, and not to any other category of Armed Forces Personnel mentioned hereinabove.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis.

6. We do not see any error in the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) and therefore all the appeals which pertain to the concept of rounding-off of the disability pension are dismissed, with no order as to costs.

7. The dismissal of these matters will be taken note of by the High Courts as well as by the Tribunals in granting appropriate relief to the pensioners before them, if any, who are getting or are entitled to the disability pension."

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to dispute the said proposition of law having been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Ram Avtar's case (supra) to the effect that percentage of disability is to be rounded off and when applied in present case, disability of 30% is to be rounded off to 50%.

2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 11-11-2025 10:45:54 ::: CWP-31227-2025 3

6. As per the settled principle of settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as 'Balbir Singh Vs. Union of India and Others' to which Civil Appeal No. 3086 of 2012 decided on 08.04.2016, the benefit of arrears cannot be restricted and the respondents cannot be allowed to take the benefit of their own wrong. The relevant paragraph of the said judgment is extracted hereinafter:

"The Tribunal was therefore justified in restoring the service element of the pension in favour of the appellant. The question however is whether the arrears could have been restricted to three years only. The Tribunal in our view need not have done so. That is because the appellant had a right to receive service element of the pension in light of Regulation 186 (supra), which right was valuable and ought to have been protected. The fact that the appellant had approached the Tribunal for redress belatedly was in the peculiar circumstances of the case, no reason for the Tribunal to reduce the payment of arrears to three years only."

7. Keeping in view the facts and circumstance of the present case as well as the settled principle of law settled in Ram Avtar's case (supra), once at the time of selection, respondent No. 1 was medically examined and was found fit in all respects and it was only during the service, respondent No.1 was found suffering from 'ID (i) Bil Corneal Opacities Lenticular Opacitics Be (ii) Ischaemic Heart Disease Silent ASM-I IHD (II) Obesity' and disability No. (ii) was held to be aggravated by the military service, which disability itself was 30%, claim of respondent No.1 for the benefit of disability pension by rounding off the disability from 30% to 50% as per the settled principle of law settled in Ram Avtar's case (supra) has rightly been allowed by the Tribunal.

8. No other argument has been raised.

3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 11-11-2025 10:45:54 ::: CWP-31227-2025 4

9. Hence, in the absence of any perversity being pointed out in the impugned order dated 24.07.2024 (Annexure P-1) either on the basis of the facts or the settled principle of law, no ground is made out for any interference by this Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

10. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.




                                       (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
                                              JUDGE



October 17, 2025                               (VIKAS SURI)
harsha                                            JUDGE

             Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
             Whether reportable       : No




                                      4 of 4
                   ::: Downloaded on - 11-11-2025 10:45:54 :::