Armed Forces Tribunal
Smt Chandro wdo Late Sep Bhagmal (Army) vs UOI & Others on 11 September 2025
ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, JAIPUR
22.
OA No 59/2023 with MA No 79/2023
Smt Chandro, Wd/o No-2631600 Sep Bhagmal, R/o Vill-Mahrampur, Post-Dharsun, Tehsil-Narnaul, Distt- Mohindergarh (Haryana), presently resident of 305, AWHO, Phase-6, Near MGPS School, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan)
…. Applicant
Versus
1.
The Union of India, through the Secretary to the Govt of India, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi
2.
PCDA (P), Allahabad (UP)
3.
The OIC Records, The Granadiers
PIN-908776, C/o 56 APO
4.
DPDO, Narnaul, Mohindergarh Road, Narnaul (Haryana)
…. Respondents
For Applicant
: Mr Yogendra Singh/Sunil Kumar, Advocate For Respondents : Mr Arun Kumar, Advocate
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
11.09.2025
1. By way of this Application under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has prayed for directing the Respondents to grant additional pension @ 20% to the Applicant wef 10.11.2020 and that the arrears be paid @ 12% per annum.
2. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the Applicant are that the Late husband of the Applicant was enrolled in the Army on 16.02.1948 and after discharge from Service on 17.03.1964, he was granted Service Pension for life. After death of her husband on 17.12.1986, the Applicant has been granted Family Pension wef 18.12.1986. As per the documents available with the Applicant, her date of birth is 10.11.1940 and is eligible for grant of additional pension @ 20% on attaining the age of 80 years in terms of Govt of
India O.M. No 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dt 02.09.2008. The documents which are accepted as proof of date of birth of a family pension in terms of Govt of India, Ministry of Defence letter No 1(11)/2009-D(Pen/Pol) dt 23.12.2014 and PCDA (P) Circular No 535 dt 27.01.2015 are also available with the Applicant and according to these documents, her date of birth is 10.11.1940 and the Applicant is above 80 years of age. The Applicant made representations to the Respondents for grant of additional pension on attaining age of 80 years, but to no avail. Therefore, the aggrieved Applicant has filed present OA.
3. The Respondents have filed a detailed Reply Statement and while not disputing the basic facts presented by the Applicant, they have submitted that the service documents of Applicant’s husband have been destroyed after expiry of mandatory retention period. However, as per the digital sheet roll maintained by the Record Office, date of birth of the Applicant is 16.06.1946 (78 years). Further, as per PCDA (P) Circular No 397 dt 18.11.2011, the amount of additional quantum of family pension will be paid directly by the Pension Disbursing Agency (PDA) without any individual authorization where date of birth of pensioner is available in the PPO. Since, the Applicant has not attained the age of 80 years, she is not entitled for grant of additional quantum of family pension.
4. Heard Learned Counsels for both the parties and perused the material placed before us.
5. The Applicant has placed on record copies of PAN Card, Aadhar Card and ECHS Card wherein date of birth of the Applicant is mentioned as 10.11.1940. The Applicant has also placed on record copy of Corr PPO No S/Corr/6th CPC/161019/2013 dt 31 Oct 2013, wherein date of birth of the Applicant is not mentioned (Annexure A/3). The Applicant has also placed on record the copy of Discharge Certificate wherein name and date of birth of the Applicant has not been mentioned (Annexure A/2). On the other hand, the Respondents have mentioned in the Reply Statement that as per records, the date of birth of the Applicant is 16.06.1946 but the Respondents have not placed any document on record wherein the date of birth of the Applicant has been mentioned as 16.06.1946. However, the Respondents have placed on record a copy of Board of Officers proceedings wherein the service documents of the Applicant have been destroyed and in these proceedings only date of enrolment and discharge of service personnel have been mentioned.
6. Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that the Respondents have placed no document on record wherein the date of birth of the Applicant is mentioned as 16.06.1946, we direct the Respondents that if a representation from the Applicant along with relevant documents is submitted within one month of the receipt of this Order, the Respondents will reconsider the case of the Applicant within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation in terms of PCDA (P) Circular No 535 dt 27.01.2015 and other relevant rules/ regulations/policies.
7. The OA is disposed off accordingly. Pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, also stand disposed off.
8. No order on costs.
(SANJIV MITTAL)
(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)
MEMBER (J)
Ssy/-