Accounts Office Can't Overturn Pension Claim When There Is Positive Declaration By Authorities: AFT Grants Relief To Widow 24 Yrs After Pilot's Death
The Chandigarh Bench of Armed Forces Tribunal recently granted 'Liberalized Family Pension' to the wife of a deceased Air Force Pilot whose helicopter crashed due to the treacherous weather conditions while undertaking life saving missions in 1999 in Himachal Pradesh."It is settled law that when there is a positive declaration in favour of the claimant by the concerned authority, it cannot...
The Chandigarh Bench of Armed Forces Tribunal recently granted 'Liberalized Family Pension' to the wife of a deceased Air Force Pilot whose helicopter crashed due to the treacherous weather conditions while undertaking life saving missions in 1999 in Himachal Pradesh.
"It is settled law that when there is a positive declaration in favour of the claimant by the concerned authority, it cannot be overturned by the Accounts Branch which is only supposed to calculate the amount of pension and not to sit over the findings of the competent authority," said the bench of Justice Dharma Chand Chaudhary and Lt. Gen Dr. Ranbir Singh.
The Tribunal was hearing the plea moved by the widow of the pilot, who died while rescuing German tourists stranded in Lahaul- Spiti in 1999. A Special Family Pension was sanctioned to the Pilot's wife in 1999 but the respondents rejected her claim for Liberalised Family Pension.
In 2001, the Defence Ministry issued a policy with retrospective effect from 01.01.1996 covering there under the deaths occurred while called upon in aid to civil authorities during natural calamities and entitling the next of kin for grant of Liberalised Family Pension.
The respondents though had granted the Special Family Pension to the applicant, however, rejected her claim for the grant of Liberalized Family Pension on the sole ground that in terms of a letter issued in 2011, "such benefits were available only to casualties occurring after the issuance of the said letter and the cases settled prior to the issuance of the same shall not be reopened," submitted the Union.
On the other hand, the counsel appearing for the applicant, Navdeep Singh argued that the issues raised in the application are squarely covered in favour of the applicant by "Category-D policy"issued in 2001 which is effective from 1996.
Considering the submissions and materials on records, the bench rejected the respondent's contention and allowed the plea stating that, "The respondents though have granted the Special Family Pension to the applicant, however, rejected her claim for the grant of Liberalized Family Pension on the sole ground that in terms of Para 2 of letter dated 03.02.2011, such benefits were available only to casualties occurring after the issuance of the said letter and the cases settled prior to the issuance of the same shall not be reopened."
When the applicant has successfully made out a case that the points in issue in this application are covered in her favour by the 2001 policy, she is also entitled to the said benefits, added the Court.
The bench directed the authorities to grant her the Liberalised Family Pension instead of Special Family Pension with effect from next day of the death of her husband, within 3 months from date of the receipt of certified copy of the order.
Case Title: Madhulika Siddiqui v. UOI & Ors.
Counsel for the applicant: Navdeep Singh with Akanksha Duvedi, Advocates
Counsel for the respondent: Satyawan Ahlawat Sr PC