Armed Forces Tribunal
Ex Nk Mahabir Prasad vs UOI & Others on 26 February 2026
ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, JAIPUR
S/1
OA No 131/2024 with MA Nos 204/2024 and 331/2025
Ex Nk Mahabir Prasad
…. Applicant
Versus
UOI & Others
…. Respondents
For Applicant
: Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
For Respondents
: Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate (R 1 – 3)
Mr. Yash Sharma, Advocate (R 4)
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR, MEMBER (J)
HON’BLE MR. SANJIV MITTAL, 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.
O R D E R
26.02.2026
1. We have heard the counsels for the parties and perused the material placed on record.
2. Perusal of record reveals that the applicant was discharged from service wef 15/11/1991 after rendering 15 years and 19 days of service in Group ‘Y’ in the rank of Naik. He was granted both Service Element and Disability Element for life vide PPO dated 17/2/1992 and 21/4/2002 respectively. However, based on the representation made by the applicant, Records The Kumaon Regiment, vide its letter dated 06/3/2023, wrote to the SPARSH/PCDA (P), stating therein that the applicant has been granted Invalid Pension instead of Disability Pension.
3. During the course of hearing, Counsel for the Respondent PDA submits that the Respondent PDA has no role in this matter as upon migration of the pension account of the Applicant to SPARSH/PCDA (P) in August 2022, they have issued a Non Payment Certificate dated 25/6/2024 for an outstanding amount of Rs 8,35,622/- to be paid to the applicant as arrears. In support of his arguments, the Respondent PDA has also filed their Reply Statement in this regard. Contra to this, Counsel for the Applicant
2
submits that despite best efforts and submission of a copy of relevant RBI guidelines issued via a Circular to the Counsel for the Respondent PDA with regard to entitlement of interest on the delayed payment, interest amount as admissible on the delayed payment to the applicant has still not been paid to the applicant.
4. In view of the foregoing, we direct the Respondents to work out the amount of interest involved for the delayed payment of arrears of disability element of disability pension paid to the applicant in terms of extant rules on the subject to the applicant within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.
5. The OA is disposed off accordingly. No order on costs.
6. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
(SANJIV MITTAL)
(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)
MEMBER (J)
cda/-