Armed Forces Tribunal
Daily order 21.03.2017 in MA-12-2017 on 21 March 2017
IN THE ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL
REGIONAL BENCH, GUWAHATI.
MA – 12/2017
Ex-Nb Sub Zamchinlam Simte
…..Applicant.
By legal practitioners
for Applicant.
Mrs Rita Devi
Mr. AR Tahbildar
-Versus-
1. Union of India,
Represented by the Secretary,
Ministry of Defence, Sena Bhawan,
South Block, New Delhi-110011.
2. Records The Assam Regiment,
PIN (ARMY) - 900332, C/o 99 APO.
3. Additional Director General,
Personnel Services, PS-4(d)
Adjutant Gneral’s Branch,
IHQ of MoD(Army), DHQ,
P.O. New Delhi.
4. The Principal Controller of Defence Acctts (Pension), Allahabad, Pin 211014, Uttar Pradesh.
.
…….Respondents
By legal practitioners
for Respondents.
Mr. C.Barua,CGSC.
PRESENT
HON`BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.KATAKEY, MEMBER (J)
HON`BLE VICE ADMIRAL MP MURALIDHARAN, MEMBER (A)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
21.03.2017. Heard Mrs. Rita Devi, learned Counsel for the applicant and Mr. Chandra Barua, learned Central Govt. Standing Counsel assisted by Col Anand, OIC, Legal Cell, Guwahati appearing for the respondents.
-2-
2. The applicant has filed this M.A. seeking condonation of delay contending, inter alia, that since the claim for disability element of the pension in the O.A. is based on continuing cause of action, the delay needs to be condonned.
3. Learned Counsel appearing for the repondents, on the other hand, submits that since the applicant has failed to demonstrate any sufficient cause in filing the O.A., the delay may not be condonned.
4. The claim of the aplicant in the O.A. is for grant of disability element of the pension, which is being based on continuing cause of action, and hence we are of the considered opinion that the M.A. needs to be disposed of with the observation that in the event the applicant is found to be entitled to the claim made in the O.A., the arrear may be restricted for a period of 3 (three) years preceding the date of filing of the O.A.
5. M.A. is accordingly disposed of.
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
Nath.