Supreme Court Directs Centre To Pay Interest On Arrears Of Disability Pension To 1971 Indo-Pak War Veteran Who Lost His Right Leg

Update: 2024-09-19 15:05 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

The Supreme Court today (September 19) directed the Union of India to pay interest on the arrears of disability pension to a retired army officer who lost his right leg below the knee during the 1971 Indo-Pak war.A bench of Justice Abhay Oka, Justice Pankaj Mihal and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah partly allowed an appeal by the veteran seeking interest on arrears of his disability pension after...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Supreme Court today (September 19) directed the Union of India to pay interest on the arrears of disability pension to a retired army officer who lost his right leg below the knee during the 1971 Indo-Pak war.

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka, Justice Pankaj Mihal and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah partly allowed an appeal by the veteran seeking interest on arrears of his disability pension after it was enhanced by the Armed Forced Tribunal.

Learned ASG appearing for the respondent submits that though the appellant was not entitled to get the relief prior to 01.01.2016, it is only because the appellant has sustained injuries in the Indo-Pak war that the respondent did not challenge the impugned judgement. The fact remains that the entitlement of the appellant as granted by the Tribunal was not challenged by the respondent. It is true that the Original Application was belatedly filed on 16th March 2022. In our view, appellant ought to have been granted interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the differential amount as directed to be paid in terms of paragraph 8 of the judgement for a period of 3 years starting from 17th March 2019 till the date of payment of arrears in terms of paragraph 8 of the impugned judgement. We grant time of 3 months to the respondent to pay the interest amount. Appeal is partly allowed in the above terms”, the Court observed.

The appellant had originally been commissioned into the army in 1970 and was injured in a mine blast during operations in the 1971 Indo-Pak war. His right leg was amputated below the knee, and he was fitted with a prosthesis. Upon his retirement in 1998, he was granted a war injury pension at the rate of 60 percent for life. In 2022, the appellant filed an application before the Armed Forces Tribunal seeking the war injury pension to be increased to 75 percent.

Last year, the Tribunal directed the Union of India to grant him the increased disability pension retroactively from April 1, 1998. However, the appellant approached the Supreme Court seeking interest on the arrears from April 1, 1998.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati submitted that appellant was not entitled to the increased pension prior to January 1, 2016, but the government did not challenge the Tribunal's order considering the nature of the officer's war injuries.

The Supreme Court observed that although the officer filed the Original Application belatedly in March 2022, ultimately his entitlement to the 75 percent disability pension was not challenged by the Centre.

The Court directed the Union of India to pay interest at the rate of 6 percent per annum on the differential amount for three years, from March 17, 2019, until the arrears are cleared. The Court allowed three months for the interest payment to be made.

In an earlier hearing on August 28, 2023, the Supreme Court had noted that while the appellant sought interest on the additional 15 percent component of his disability pension, the Union of India had changed its stance and decided to challenge the Tribunal's judgment delivered on November 10, 2022. The Court opined that the government's attempt to file a belated SLP seemed to be a change of thought after the appellant had sought a very limited relief of interest.

The Court then pointed out the portion of the impugned judgment to highlighting the appellant's service injury in the Indo-Pak war of 1971, remarking, “We hope and trust that the authority which takes a decision to challenge the impugned order will surely consider what is mentioned in paragraph 3 of the impugned judgment.

Ultimately, the Centra did not challenge the judgment in favour of the appellant.

Case no. – Civil Appeal Nos. 4205-4206/2023

Case Title – Colonel Mahinder Kumar Engrs (Retd.) v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 769

Click Here To Read Download Order

Tags:    

Similar News