Ex L Nk Pratap Singh vs UOI & Others on 29 August 2025

1. 1. UOI, through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi – 110 011

2. 2. The OIC Records, The Rajputana Rifles, PIN 900 106, c/o 56 APO

3. 3. Army Group Insurance Fund, AG's Branch, IHQ of MoD (Army), Rao Tula Ram Marg, New Delhi – 110 057

**.... Respondents**

सम्पमेव जयते

**For Applicant For Respondents**

**: Mr Samuel-Masih, Advocate : Mr Veer Aditya Singh, Proxy for Mr Yuvraj Singh, Advocate**

**CORAM:**

**HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR, MEMBER (J) HON'BLE MR. SANJIV MITTAL, MEMBER (A)**


1. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the applicant has filed this OA praying for directing the Respondents to release Pension, DCRG/commutation of pension including all the retiral benefits to the applicant. He has also prayed for directing the Respondent No 3 to finalise the AGIF maturity claim of the applicant and remit the amount due with interest and that recall/cancel the show cause notice dated 23/4/2015 and not to initiate any contemplated action under Section 20 (3) of the Army Act 1950 or, in the alternative, to finalise the case of the applicant to discharge him from service by regularising the Absent Without Leave period as per the law and release the benefits to the applicant.


2. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the applicant are that the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 28/7/1989. During December 2004, the applicant had proceeded on short leave, but could not return to his unit, 9 RAJ RIF, and became absent without leave (AWL) due to mental imbalance and was SOS on 13/12/2004 and subsequently he was discharged from service on 31/7/2006. Although the applicant reported to his parent unit in August 2006 and met the Subedar Major of the Unit and was also taken to the then Commanding Officer, but was instructed to go back and he was told that his retirement benefits will follow. Thereafter, the applicant received a letter from the Unit intimating the applicant that his AFPP Fund account has a balance of Rs 73,422/- and he has also a debit balance of Rs 25,639/- and that his account would be closed on 31/8/2006 and if so desired, he may withdraw the amount and also deposit the debit amount, Annexure A/1. In response to the request of the applicant to release his retirement benefits vide letters dated 13/10/2006 and 20/2/2007 sent to the Respondents and in response to that the Respondents vide their letter dated 09/3/2007 intimated the applicant that a case has been taken up with the higher formation for grant of pension/gratuity and the AGI Fund claim and sooner the reply is received, the claim will be forwarded to PCDA (P). The applicant sent a reminder also in this regard for which he was told that the case was with the higher formation and the outcome will be intimated once received from them. Finally, a sum of Rs 47,595/- was remitted to the spouse of the applicant vide letter dated 06/8/2008. The applicant had also submitted claim forms for grant of AGIF benefits sent to him by the Respondents through the concerned Zila Sainik Board Office. Despite all out efforts of the applicant in getting discharge book/pension book nothing has been heard from the Respondents. However, out of the blue, the applicant received a Show Cause Notice vide letter dated 23/4/2015 duly signed by Brigadier Adish Yadav with a specific direction to the applicant that a reply must reach his office by 29/4/2015, failing which, action under Section 20 (3) of the Army Act 1950 to terminate the service of the applicant would be taken accordingly, Annexure A/11. Applicant further submits that the Show Cause Notice dated 23/4/2015, was despatched by Registered Post only on 28/4/2015 as endorsed on the envelope and had been delivered to the applicant on 13/5/2015, Annexure A/12. Without loss of any time, the applicant submitted his reply to the Show Cause Notice vide his letter dated 16/5/2015, giving an account of the delay which ought not have been taken as default on his part and that the reply could not have been sent so as to reach the Respondents by 29/4/2015. Since neither any contemplated action and or reply to the Show Cause Notice as desired and or any such action taken or proposed to be taken by the Respondents No 2 has been received till date and thus the counsel for the applicant as a last ditch attempt sent another notice vide letter dated 26/10/2015 seeking justice. Vide this letter, the applicant had emphasised that the applicant had more than 15 years of service to his credit and having not been dealt with in any manner and deemed discharged on completion of his service for the tenure of Sep/L/Nk vis-à-vis the contents of their letter of 20/7/2007, Annexure A/2 to kindly release the entire retiral benefits and the AGIF claim amount within a period of four weeks, failing which the applicant will be left with no other option but to institute and approach the Hon'ble Circuit Bench, Jodhpur of the AFT, Jaipur Bench, Annexure A/14. Having been aggrieved, the applicant has filed this OA, praying for relief.

3. Counsel for the applicant has also filed MA No 409/2024 on 23/9/2024, enclosing a copy of the medical certificate dated 20/1/2005 issued by the Govt Hospital, Beawar, where the applicant was treated during the period when he was absented from leave and overstayed leave due to his sickness and was constrained from joining his duty on time, Annexure MA/1. He further submits that a certificate was issued by the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Kant Kirana, Panchayat Samiti, Raipur, certifying that the applicant while on his leave in the year 2004 got mental sickness for which he was taken to Govt Hospital, Bhim, from where he was referred to Govt Hospital, Beawar for further treatment, Annexure MA/2. These facts were also reiterated by the counsel for the applicant during the final hearing held on 25/8/2025.

4. The Respondents have filed Reply Statement and submitted that the applicant, Ex Rfn Pratap Singh, was enrolled in the Army on 28/7/1989 and on completion of his basic military training, he was posted to 9 RAJ RIF wef 28/7/1990. As per service records with the Respondent No 2, ie, Record Office, Raj Rif, the applicant had committed the following three offences and was, therefore, summarily tried under Army Act Section 80 :- <table border="1"> <thead> <tr> <th>Ser No</th> <th>Army Act Section &amp; Charges</th> <th>No of days of Non qualifying Service</th> <th>Punishment Awarded</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>(a)</td> <td>39 (b).<br/>Absenting himself without leave from 20/10/1993 and rejoined on 14/12/1993</td> <td>56 Days</td> <td>14 Days RI on 25/12/1993 by the Commanding Officer</td> </tr> <tr> <td>(b)</td> <td>39 (b).<br/>Absenting himself without leave from 13/8/1998 and rejoined on 01/9/1998</td> <td>20 Days</td> <td>14 Days Pay Fine on 29/5/1999 by the Commanding Officer</td> </tr> <tr> <td>(c)</td> <td>39 (b).<br/>Absenting himself without leave from 04/3/1999 and rejoined on 20/5/1999</td> <td>78 Days</td> <td>28 Days RI and 14 days Detention on 29/5/1999 by the Commanding Officer</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

Further, while serving with 9 Raj Rif, the applicant was granted 30 days of Advance Annual Leave for the year 2005 wef 12/11/2004 to 12/12/2004, but he did not rejoin duty on expiry of the said leave. Accordingly, the Unit has issued Desertion Roll vide their letter dated 05/2/2005 by declaring the applicant as a deserter wef 13/12/2004, Annexure R/1. Thereafter, the applicant reported to the Record Office alongwith an application dated 13/10/2006 for grant of service pension. Since he had already completed his terms of engagement of service on 31/7/2006 (AN), hence, it was not advisable to take him on strength or allow him to rejoin duty to avoid irregular retention in service. Further, application of the applicant for grant of pensionary benefits was also suitably replied to by the Respondents. Outstanding dues of AFPP and AGIF benefits to the tune of Rs 47,595/- and Rs 58,735/- respectively were paid to the applicant by the Record Office and the AGIF. Further, as per the existing policy, the applicant was to be dismissed from service in terms of Army Act 20(3) being a deserter and accordingly, as was required, a show cause notice was issued to the applicant vide Records Raj Rif letter dated 23/4/2015 prior to his dismissal.

Subsequently, the applicant was dismissed from service by the order of the Commandant, The Rajputana Rifles Regimental Centre under Army Act Section 20 (3) wef 30/4/2015, Annexure R/5. Legal Notice dated 26/10/2015 served by the applicant seeking pensionary grants was replied to by the Respondents vide their letter dated 26/12/2015. Respondents further submit that in terms of Para 113 (a) of Pension Regulations for the Army 1961, Part I, discharge book/pension book is issued to an individual who is discharged from service and is granted pensionary benefits. In the instant case, the applicant was a deserter and therefore, was dismissed from service by the Commandant of the Raj Rif Regimental Centre under Army Act wef 30/4/2015.


सत्यमेव जयते

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

6. It is evident from the perusal of record that the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 28/7/1989 on his own volition to serve the Army and the Nation. On culmination of his basic military training, the applicant was posted to 9 RAJPUTANA RIFLES, wef 28/7/1990. Within three years of his joining his parent Unit, the applicant was chargesheeted three times in the year 1993, 1998 and 1999 for absenting himself without leave for a period of 56 days, 20 days and 78 days respectively, a cumulative absence of 154 days, for which he was awarded RI for the first and third absence and Pay fine for 20 days absence without leave. Despite these punishments for his misdemeanour of absenting himself at his will on three occasions, the applicant again absented himself without leave wef 13/12/2004 when he was granted 30 days' advance Annual Leave for the year 2005 wef 12/11/2004 to 12/12/2004. Accordingly, and as is mandated, the Unit concerned issued a Desertion Roll vide their letter dated 05/2/2005, declaring the applicant as a Deserter wef 13/12/2004. Although the applicant maintained a stoic silence during the period of his absent without leave for about one year and ten months, he reported to the Respondents alongwith an application dated 13/10/2006 for grant of service pension and other retiral benefits. Since the applicant had already completed his terms of engagement of service on 31/7/2006, he was not allowed to rejoin his duty so as to avoid irregular retention in service. Thereafter, the applicant was dismissed from service wef 30/4/2015 after

serving a Show Cause Notice to the applicant in terms of Army Act Section 20 (3). In fact, the Applicant had voluntarily joined the Army to serve the Nation, but contrary to the Oath administered by him, he has clearly belied the trust reposed upon him to remain disciplined while discharging his military duty. This Tribunal is fully cognizant of the fact that the object of appropriate punishment to military personnel is not merely to inflict punishment, but also to ensure that undue leniency does not set a bad precedent for others to emulate, and jeopardise the overall discipline and operational wellbeing of a fighting Army Unit. In the instant case, the applicant wilfully remained Absent Without Leave for 154 days during his initial days with his parent Unit on three different occasions, making it clear that he had no enthusiasm or inclination of serving the Army and he had turned out to be a habitual offender, giving scant regard to the discipline to be maintained in a fighting Army Unit for which he was trained for. Our countrymen bestow great faith and trust in the institution of Army as a role model which cannot be diluted at any cost and, thus, no leniency can be bestowed on such individuals who remains indisciplined. Therefore, we are of the firm opinion that the Respondents have carried out the action against the applicant in adherence with the procedure laid down and he was rightly dismissed from service in terms of prevailing rules and policies and under the circumstances, we find no illegality or infirmity in the action taken by the Respondents in dismissing the applicant warranting our interference. At the time of desertion of the applicant wef 13/12/2004, he was granted leave of absence wef 12/11/2004, the applicant had rendered 15 years and three months. However, taking into account his 154 days Non Qualifying Service due to his wilful absent without leave on three occasion (supra), the total physical service rendered by the applicant comes to less than fifteen years. Since he was AWL, he was dismissed from service wef 30/4/2015 as per extant regulations/policy on the subject as a deserter. At that particular time, the Unit of the applicant was deployed in Modified Field Area. The plea, therefore, of the applicant for his reinstatement in service with consequential benefits has no merit and is rejected.

7. While the counsel for the applicant has filed the OA on 08/12/2015, but he has adroitly filed MA No 409/2024 on 23/9/2024, enclosing a copy of the medical certificate dated 20/1/2005 only to reinforce the arguments that the desertion of the applicant was due to his purported illness. He has also placed on record a statement, MA/2, signed by the Sarpatch concerned repeating the ill health of the applicant for his AWL. The Counsel for the applicant has also reiterated these points of ill health of the applicant which prompted him not to rejoin his duty on time on expiry of his leave granted to him. It would be prudent to observe that these medical certificate produced to prove the ill health of the applicant when he remained AWL in 2004 cannot be taken in its face value at this belated stage as it cannot be considered as a credible and/or tangible evidence to prove the sickness of the Applicant. In case the applicant was indeed suffering from ill health as stated by him during the period he was AWL, he could have easily approached the nearest Military Hospital by showing his Identity Card and got treated there, but he did not do so. Therefore, the medical documents and statement of the Sarpatch concerned do not qualify to be a cause for his stated absence from duty. Moreover, since when have the Sarpanch become medically qualified to certify someone's sickness?

8. The dismissed Armed Forces Personnel are not entitled to any pensionary benefits in terms of Para 113 of Pension Regulations for the Army 1961, Part I, reproduced at Regulation 41 of the Pension Regulations for the Army 2008, which reads as follows :- **"Individual Dismissed/Removed/Discharged under the Army Act.**

41. (a) *An individual who is dismissed under the provisions of Army Act, 1950 or removed under the Rules made thereunder as a measure of penalty, will be ineligible for pension or gratuity in respect of all previous service".*

9. The case of the Applicant also stands squarely covered by Judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UOI & Ors Vs Ex Sep/ASH Kulbeer Singh, in Civil Appeal No 3095 of 2017, decided on 11/3/2019 as also in the case of UOI & Ors Vs Manoj Deswal & Ors, in Civil Appeal No 5015 of 2008, decided on 28/10/2015. In yet another judgment dated 28/7/2023 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ex Sepoy Madan Prasad Vs UOI & Ors, Civil Appeal No 246 of 2017, it was held :- 

*"one must be mindful of the fact that discipline is the implicit hallmark of the Armed Forces and a non-negotiable condition of service. Therefore, he did not deserve any leniency by infliction of a punishment lesser than that which has been awarded to him. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed as meritless, while upholding the impugned judgment. The parties are left to bear their own costs".*

10. In-fine, we do not find merit in any of the pleas of the applicant and hence, this OA is **dismissed**.

11. OA is disposed off accordingly. No order on costs.

12. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed off.


सत्यमेव जयते


(SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A)


(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J)

cda/-