Armed Forces Tribunal
Ex LNk Vishambar Lal Sharma (Army) vs UOI & Others on 16 December 2025
ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, JAIPUR
11.
TA 01/2020 (WP 7506/2006)
Ex L/Nk Vishambar Lal Sharma, S/o Shri Onkar Lal Sharma, Resident of Village Bhagalpur, Post Fatehpur, Tehsil and District Karauli, Rajasthan
…. Applicant
Versus
1.
UOI, through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Central Secretariat, New Delhi
2.
Lt Gen/(sic) General, Chief of the Army Staff, Army HQ, New Delhi
3.
The Director, Directorate of Defence, Union of India, New Delhi
…. Respondents
For Applicant
: Mr. Karan Pal Singh Choudhary, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Pyare Lal, Senior Panel Counsel
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
16.12.2025
1. By way of this Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and in the matter of illegal termination of the petitioner, the Petitioner (hereinafter called the “Applicant”) had filed SB Civil Writ Petition No 7506/2006 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur, praying for quashing and setting aside the Orders dated 06/7/1999 and 15/11/2002 and that the Respondents be directed to resinstate the Applicant in service with all consequential benefits. He had also prayed for directing the Respondents to grant all benefits arising out of his service and pay the arrears with interest @24% pa. any other relief as deemed fit by the Hon’ble Court.
2. With the inception of the Armed Forces Tribunal Jaipur Bench, the Hon’ble High Court, vide Order dated 29/10/2014, ordered the CWP to be transferred to this Tribunal immediately to adjudicate on the same. However, the WP alongwith all relevant copies was ordered to be transferred to this Tribunal vide Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court letter dated 21/23.07.2020 which was received at this Tribunal on 24/7/2020 and numbered as TA No 01 of 2020.
3. We have heard the counsels for the parties and perused the material placed on record.
4. Perusal of the material on record and based on the reply statement filed by the Respondents, it was revealed that the applicant had earlier filed a Writ Petition bearing No 3163/2000 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur, seeking reinstatement in service. The Writ Petition was disposed off by the Hon’ble High Court vide Order dated 23/1/2001, wherein Respondents were directed to decide the Appeal of the Applicant which was pending for decision of the Chief of the Army Staff. Thereafter, Chief of the Army Staff, vide his Order dated 15/11/2002, rejected the Appeal of the Applicant. Subsequently, on the basis of the said Order of the Chief of the Army Staff, the Hon’ble High Court dismissed the petition of the applicant being infructuous. The applicant had been discharged from service on 08/7/1999 at his own request on compassionate grounds on the grounds that his son was blind and his wife was a TB patient. He had rendered about 13 years’ service in the Army.
5. In view of the foregoing and since the applicant was discharged from service at his own request on compassionate grounds due to his compelling domestic reasons, we are not inclined to interfere with the decision to discharge him from service based on his own request on compassionate grounds. Moreover, since he had done the Army service for a period of little over 13 years, he was not entitled to pension, the minimum service required for grant of pension being 15 years.
6. However, with regard to the plea of the applicant for grant of pensionary benefits, the applicant shall be at liberty to make a fresh Representation before the competent authority, if so desired. In case the applicant does so, it is expected that the competent authority shall decide the representation so filed by the Applicant as per existing policies, rules and regulations and the outcome thereof shall be intimated to him expeditiously.
7. TA stands disposed off accordingly. No order on costs.
(SANJIV MITTAL)
(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)
MEMBER (J)
cda/-