As per the judgment of ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL,
Dear All
Link given for action
PRINCIPAL BENCH AT NEW DELHI in RA 25/2013 with MA 234/2013 in OA 256/2011 delivered on 09 Oct 2013 all Majors who had completed 21 yrs service prior to 1996 are now entitled to Pension of Lt Col(TS).The judgment can be accessed on link http://www.aftdelhi.nic.in/ass
The case was a review petition which has been rejected and no leave given for appeal.
Officers may apply quoting this judgment.
Secy RDOA
11 comments:
This would be a most welcome update for those affected. It remains to be seen if the judgement would be appealed against.
It may also be useful for readers to understand if, and how, the issue is linked to the post 1996 Major retirees as covered in this blog post.
At first glance it had appeared to some that there was a parallel with the situation affecting pre AVS-I Lt Col pensioners with more than 26 years of service. However, it was clarified once by Maj Navdeep the decision regarding Maj pensioners was in respect of a specific litigation.
An effect, if any, on the pension of pre AVS-I Lt Col retirees, with a service of 26 yrs or more, is still open to debate and discussion, as I had tried to point out earlier. Please see under {Edit 2}.
I don't really understand what all these really mean.
1. AFT Principal bench has given a ruling
2. AFT has not permitted further by the govt. in the supreme court.
So far, so good.
But who cares for the AFT judgment? Not the MOD, at least. The govt. is known not to implement so many AFT judgments. There is difficulty in getting the dues even after HSC judgments in favour of the veterens. I have my doubts!!
Ofcourse, one should not stop trying!
@Sainathan,
Review Petitions are usually heard in chambers by the same Bench, wherever possible.
As a Review Petition has been rejected by the Principal Bench AFT, the Respondents can only file a Curative Petition.
The norms for a Curative Petition have been laid down in the Ashok Hurra case. You may wish to read that order of the Apex Court. Then you will understand.
That also could have been the case in the Rank Pay case but UoI filed an IA and therefore the matter was heard in open court.
I do not understand the intricacies of the case. .I am only interested to know whether now we will be able to get the pension of lt col ts or not.or Govt( MOD) will again create hurdles as usual
i retired on 31 march 1988.completed 24 years of service at the time of retirement.i sent the papers as required quoting this judgement.case has been turned down saying since i retired on 31 march 1988,not eligible.pl advice whether the case should be taken up again or it is not applicable to me. thanks and regards
My case is similar to OM DUTT JOSHI. I retired on 31/01/1991 .My application was also TURNED DOWN in June 2013 .UOI has not reacted so far .PCDA ALLAHBAD has also not issued any circular . Is there any surety that if I/WE apply again ,the application(s) would not get turned down again ? Or ,alternately, we wait and watch.
My case is identical to OM DUTT JOSHI .I retired on 31/01/1991 .My application was also turned down during June 2013 .UOI HAS NOT REACTED so far. PCDA ALLAHBAD has also not issued any circular in this regard . DO WE APPLY NOW? What is the probability of acceptance of our case now ? Can UOI file curative appeal in this case ? What next ?
I retired on 29-09-1992 as a substantive Major with qualifying service of 29 years 2 months and 12 days. I am an SL Commissioned Officer from the Corps of Signals.I have been waiting for a circular from PCDA Allahabad after the verdict by AFT Chandigarh. I hope MOD would look into this matter without purchasing more time and does what is right to maintain the morale of men in service and who spent their lives for the country. The present government has done good so far to the Army Personnel who make country proud in many ways and pray they do this too to maintain their reputation!
Dear all affected Veterans,
Courts are reduced to be Powerless entities as the heartless babus are allowed to err repeatedly because they are supported by the MoD for reasons only known to them.
Post a Comment