Hony Nb Sub Dev Karan Singh vs UOI & Others on 31 August 2026

O R D E R

31.08.2026

1. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, the Applicant has filed this OA praying therein for directing the Respondents to grant correct Basic Pay to the Applicant wef 01.07.2024 and that the arrears be paid along with interest @ 12% per annum.

2. Brief facts of the case as stated by the Applicant are that he was enrolled in the Army on 18.11.1984 and was discharged from Service on 31.01.2006 and was granted Service Pension for the rank of Havildar wef 01.02.1006. After discharge from Service, he was granted Hony rank of Nb Sub on 15.08.2006 and, accordingly, he was granted Service Pension for the rank of Hony Nb Sub and the same was revised from time to time. The Pension Account of the Applicant has been transferred to PCDA (Sparsh) in the year 2023. On implementation of second OROP wef 01.07.2024, his Service Pension has been fixed @ Rs. 21,782/- pm instead of Rs. 21,988/- pm. The Applicant made representation as also issued Legal Notice for correct fixation of pension

wef 01.07.2024 as per OROP scales, but to no avail. Therefore, the aggrieved Applicant has filed present OA.

3. The Respondents have filed a detailed reply statement and have submitted that the Applicant was enrolled in 123 Inf Bn (TA) on 18.11.1984 and not in the Indian Army, as claimed by the Applicant and after rendering 15 years and 19 days of service, he was discharged from TA Service on 31.01.2006 on fulfilling the condition of enrolment under TA Act Rule 14(a) of TA Regulations 1947 (Revised 1976), read in conjunction with Rule 13(3) III (i) of Army Rules, 1954. After retirement, he was granted honorary rank of Nb Sub and, accordingly, he was granted Service Pension for the rank of Hony Nb Sub which was revised from time to time as per extant policies. The rates of Service Pension for Regular Army are categorized in two groups, ie., Group ‘X’ and ‘Y’ at Table No 7 of PCDA (P), Prayagraj Circular No 666, whereas the rates of Service Pension for TA personnel are mentioned at Table No 10 of the said Circular without any specific group in One Rank One Pension (OROP) Scheme. As per the said Tables, the rates of pension for similarly placed TA personnel are less than the rates of pension of Regular Army of Group ‘Y’. As per Table No 10 of PCDA (P) Circular No 666, the Applicant is entitled to draw Service Pension @ Rs. 20,259/- pm. Further, it has been stated by the Respondents that he is already drawing Rs. 21,782/- pm which is more than his entitlement. In view of the aforesaid facts, the Respondents have reiterated that the OA is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed with costs.

4. We have heard Learned Counsels for both the parties and perused the material placed before us.

5. It is not in dispute that the Armed Forces, viz., Army/Navy/Air Force and the Territorial Army are two different services which are governed by different sets of rules and regulations and, accordingly, their rates of pension have also been placed in different tables upon revision.

6. The salient features of OROP policy are given in Para 3 of Govt of India, Ministry of Defence, Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare letter No 12(1)/2014/D(Pen/Pol)-Part-II dt 07.11.2015, which reads as under:-

“(i) To begin with, pension of the past pensioners would be re-fixed on the basis of pension of retirees of calendar year 2013 and the benefit will be effective with effect from 1.7.2014.

(ii) Pension will be re-fixed for all pensioners on the basis of the average of minimum and maximum pension of personnel retired in 2013 in the same rank and with the same length of service.

(iii) Pension for those drawing above the average shall be protected.

(iv) Arrears will be paid in four equal half yearly instalments. However, all the family pensioners including those in receipt of Special/Liberalized Family pension and Gallantry award winners shall be paid arrears in one instalment.

(v) In future, the pension would be re-fixed every 5 years.”

7. Further, relevant paragraphs of Govt of India, Ministry of Defence letter No 1(1)/2019/D(Pen/Pol)/Vol-II dt 20.01.2023, for methodology of fixation of pension in OROP-II read as under:- “4.3. The revised rates of pension under this letter are average of minimum & maximum rate of pension for a rank and a qualified service of live data of 2018 retirees. Wherever, the rates of higher qualifying service of a rank are lower than rates of lower qualifying service in same rank or data is/are blank for higher qualifying service then the same have been protected by higher rate of lower qualifying service, due to this, many rates in same column appears equal. Similarly, wherever the revised rate of pension under this order are lower in higher rank than rate in lower rank in same qualifying service then the same have been protected with higher rates of pension in lower rank in same qualifying service resulting similar rate in some qualifying service in two adjacent columns.

5. Where the revised pension as on 01.07.2019 worked out in terms of this letter, happens to be less than the existing pension/family pension as on 01.07.2019, the pension shall not be revised to the disadvantage of the pensioner/family pensioner.”

8. On perusal of Tables 7 (applicable to Army/Navy/Air Force pensioners) and 10 (applicable to Territorial Army pensioners) of PCDA (P) Circular No 666 dt 20.01.2023, it is evident that the Service Pension of Hony Nb Sub of Army with 15 years of qualifying service has been revised to Rs. 24,160/- and Rs. 21,782/- respectively for Group “X” and “Y/Z” respectively, whereas the Service Pension of Hony Nb Sub of Territorial Army with same length of service has been fixed at Rs. 20,259/- pm wef 01.07.2019. The main distinction is that the rates of Service Pension for Army pensioners has been placed in two groups, ie., Group “X” and Group “Y/Z”, whereas in the case of Territorial Army pensioners, it has been fixed at one rate of Rs. 20,259/- pm with no group classification of “X” and “Y/Z”. On perusal of the OROP tables, it is clear that the rates of pension under OROP have been revised based on the average of

pension for the year 2018 for OROP-II for a particular rank and the qualifying service. Further, the Applicant himself has conceded that on implementation of OROP-II, his service pension has been revised to Rs. 21,782/- pm, whereas as per Table No 10 of PCDA (P) Circular No 666 dt 20.01.2023, the Service Pension of Hony Nb Sub of Territorial Army for the same length of service and Group has been fixed @ Rs. 20,259/- pm which shows that he is already drawing Service Pension at a higher rate than his entitlement wef 01.07.2019. Further, on implementation of OROP-III wef 01.07.2024, as per Table No 10 of Govt of India letter No 1(2)/2023/D (Pen/Pol) dt 04.09.2024, Service Pension of Hony Nb Sub of the Territorial Army has been fixed @ Rs. 19,737/- pm. However, since he was entitled to a higher rate of pension wef 01.07.2019 @ Rs. 20,259/- pm his pension shall be protected. It seems that the Counsel has filed this OA just for the sake of filing the OA without going through the PCDA (P) Circulars and their applicability to the Applicant. He has prayed for fixation of pension on implementation of OROP-II wef 01.07.2024, however, the OROP- II was implemented wef 01.07.2019 and not wef 01.07.2024, according to which the Applicant was entitled to a Service Pension of Rs. 20,259/- only as against Rs. 21,782/- pm being drawn by him.

9. In-fine, we find that the OA is bereft of merit on all counts and, hence, is dismissed. Pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, also stand disposed off.

10. No order on costs.

(SANJIV MITTAL)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

Ssy/-