Ex Gdr (Rest) Quayum Ali vs UOI & Others on 17 July 2026

**ORDER**

**17.07.2026**

1. By way of this Application under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has filed this OA praying for directing the Respondents to revise his Reservist Pension at par with other pensioners wef 01.01.2006 in terms of Govt of India, Ministry of Defence letter No PC 10(1)/2009-D(Pen/Pol) dt 08.03.2010.

2. Brief facts as enunciated by the Applicant are that upon discharge from Service on completion of combined colour and reserve service, he was granted Reservist Pension for life which has been revised from time to time as per the extant rules. On implementation of 6^th CPC, the Applicant has been granted Reservist Pension @ Rs. 3500/- pm wef 01.01.2006. Govt of India, vide letter No PC 10(1)/2009-D(Pen/Pol) dt 08.03.2010 [PCDA (P) vide Circular No 430 dt 10.03.2010] has revised pension of pre 2006 retiree PBOR. However, as per Para 5.2 of the GoI letter dt 08.03.2010, the Reservist Pensioners have been excluded from the provisions for revision of pension. The Applicant contests that the pensioners form a class and no discrimination can be made amongst the pensioners. Therefore, he prayed for setting aside Govt of India letter dt 08.03.2010, being arbitrary, illegal and discriminatory and to revise Reservist Pension in terms of the provisions of the aforesaid letter dt 08.03.2010. In support of his claim, the Applicant placed reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court judgments in the case of **DS Nakara & Ors Vs UOI, (1983) 1 SCC 305** and **UOI Vs SPS Vains (Retd)** in Civil Appeal No 5566/2008.

3. The Respondents have filed a detailed reply and submitted that the provisions of GoI letter dt 08.03.2010 for revision of pension are not applicable for the Reservist Pensioners. At the time of his discharge, Pension Regulations had no stipulation that the Reservist Pension will be equal to 2/3^rd of minimum pension of a regular Sepoy as per the Initial/Original version of Defence Service Regulations. Later on, the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 was further revised and Para 155 was amended after issuance of Govt of India, Ministry of Defence letter No 1(5)/87/D(Pension/Services) dt 30.10.1987. Therefore, the Applicant, being a pre-1986 retiree, is not covered under the amended Para 155 of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 (Part-1).

4. During the course of hearing, the Counsel for the Applicant has placed on record an Order dt 27.10.2025 passed by High Court of judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur which has upheld various orders of this Armed Forces Tribunal wherein the pension of the Reservists was ordered to be revised to 2/3^rd of the pension of a regular Sepoy wef 01.01.2016. On the other hand, the Counsel for the Respondents have placed on record the Hon'ble Supreme Court Interim Order dt 07.03.2025 ordering stay on the implementation of the orders of AFT (RB), Chandigarh relating to revision of Reservist Pension.

5. We have heard the counsels for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

6. In this regard, Interim Order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No 6367/2025 (arising out of the final judgment dated 27/9/2024 in CWP No 17046/2024 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh) in the case of **UOI & Ors Vs Darshan Singh Bal & Anr**, vide which the execution of impugned Order passed by the Hon'ble High Court has been stayed, as also the judgment dated 15.10.2025 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur in the DB Civil Writ Petition No 12723/2024 in the case of UOI & Ors Vs No 1033471 **Ex Swr (Reservist) Chiranjil Lal, S/o Shri Raju Ram** are relevant, which are reproduced below:- **Extract from the Order of the Hon'ble Apex Court:-**

"2. Let the notice be issued to the respondents, returnable within four weeks.

3. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order is stayed".

**Extract from the Order of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan:-**

"1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners fairly submits that the controversy can be brought to an end at this juncture by observing that since the controversy is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No 6367/2025 titled as 'Union of India & Ors Vs Darshan Singh Bal', and an interim order is also operating therein, therefore, outcome of the said SLP may govern the field in the present case.

2. Learned Counsel for the Respondent does not oppose the aforesaid proposition.

3. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction that final outcome of the aforementioned SLP pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court shall govern the position of law in the present case. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

7. Thus, it is clear that the issue of revision of Reservist Pension is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court and an interim order has since been passed staying the implementation of AFT Chandigarh Bench Order (supra) which has been appealed against in that Court. This Tribunal has also disposed off a bunch of cases vide Order dated 03.11.2025.

8. In view of the foregoing and since the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court for final adjudication, we deem it appropriate to dispose off this OA with the same direction as given at Para 3 of the ibid Hon'ble High Court Order that the final outcome of the aforementioned SLP pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court shall govern the position of law in the present case as well.

9. The OA is disposed off accordingly. Pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, also stand disposed off.

10. No order on costs.

Sd/- X X X

Sd/- X X X

(SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J)

Ss/-