Ex Hav (MACP Nb Sub) Hemant Singh Chouhan (Army) vs UOI & Others on 10 November 2025

**ORDER**

**10.11.2025**

1. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has filed this OA praying for directing the Respondents to restore two increments to the applicant which were withdrawn by the Pay Accounts Office in May 2022 and his Basic Pay be fixed at Rs 50,500/- instead of Rs 47,600/-. He has further prayed that the illegal recovery of Rs 4,95,931/- and Rs 13,000/- be directed to be refunded to the applicant alongwith interest @12% pa and accordingly, service pension be re-fixed by issuing a fresh PPO.

2. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the applicant are that the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 04/5/1996 and due to his creditable and commendable service profile, he was promoted to the rank of Havildar on 07/11/2016 and was also granted MACP Nb Sub on 04/5/2020 and finally retired from service on 31/5/2022 after an exemplary service of 26 years and 28 days. He was granted service pension on the reduced basic pay of Rs 47,600/- after effecting recovery of two increments during the month of his retirement from his qualifying service of 26 years and 28 days, Annexure A/3. He had opted date of fixation of increment wef 01/7/2020 vide the Option exercised on 27/8/2021 while serving with 16 EW Bn. His basic pay was to the tune of Rs 49,000/- in the month of Oct 2021 as per the Statement of Account for the month of October 2021. Based on the Option exercised by the applicant, his Basic Pay was fixed at Rs 50,500/- vide Statement of Account for the month of Jan 2022, Annexure A/6. However, during the month of his retirement from service, his basic pay was reduced to Rs 47,600/- by deducting two increments already granted to the applicant and thereby effecting a huge recovery of Rs 4,95,931/- through the FSA of May 2022. Further an amount of Rs 13,000/- had also been deducted as amount paid which had already been adjusted in earlier statement of accounts. Deduction of amount paid in April 2008 in the month of May 2022 again, ie, after lapse of 14 years without informing the applicant or seeking his explanation is illegal and is without any cogent reason. Reduction of basic pay of the applicant effecting recovery of two increments resulted in sanction of his service pension only at Rs 26,400/-, ie BP at Rs 47600/- +MSP of Rs 5200/- = Rs 52,800/-, instead of Rs 27,850/-, (BP Rs 50,500/- +MSP 5200/- = Rs 55,700/-), thereby monthly net financial loss of Rs 1450/- to the applicant throughout his life and subsequently to the family pension when the eventuality arises. He further submits that since the applicant had exercised the option for grant of increment in 01/7/2020 in time and as such after granting him due increments and subsequently its recovery at the time of FSA is totally against the existing policy on the subject and is illegal, Annexure A/7. In support of his arguments, the applicant has placed reliance on the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & Ors Vs Rafiq Masih & Ors, 2015 4 SCC 334, as well as the Policy laid down by the Govt of India vide their letter dated 02/3/2016, wherein it is held that the recovery cannot be made if there is no misrepresentation or mistake on the part of the individual. The Hon'ble Apex Court had also ruled that, "recoveries by the employers would be impermissible in law in case of recovery from retired employees or employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery". He has also placed reliance on the Judgment dated 20/8/2020 passed by the Nagpur Bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of LD-VC-CW-665, in which the Bank concerned had been directed to pay back the recovered amount to the petitioner therein and stop further recoveries. Having been aggrieved by the non action of the Respondents, the applicant has filed this OA, praying for relief.

सत्यमेव जयते

3. The Respondents have filed a detailed Reply Statement. While not disputing the basic facts, they have submitted that the applicant was discharged from service on 31/5/2022 under Army Rule 13 (3) item III (i) on completion of terms of engagement. He had rendered 26 years and 28 days of service for which he was granted service pension for life. He was also granted all the three financial upgradation upto the rank of Nb Sub wef 04/5/2020. Based on the Legal Notice dated 04/7/2020 sent through his Advocate about the deduction of Rs 4,95,931/- and Rs 13,000/- and also grant pension based on pay bank of Rs 50,500/- instead of the Rs 47,600/-, the case was taken up with the PAO (OR), Signals, as the sole authority dealing with pay and allowances of JCOs/OR, who, in turn, had intimated vide their letter dated 06/10/2022, which was also communicated to the counsel for the applicant vide letter dated 19/10/2022, Annexure R/1 to 3. In that the pay on grant of MACP-III wef 04/5/2020 duly allowing option exercised by the applicant wef 01/7/2020 has already been correctly fixed as per FR-22 (I) (a) (I) and other relevant order and the same has been adjusted and PPO issued accordingly. Also, the applicant was inadvertently granted two excess increments than his entitlement by the DOLPHIN System, the same has been corrected during FSA in May 2022 and necessary recovery was made accordingly. They have also submitted that during FSA it has been observed that PB Serial No 122 dated 02/4/2008 for Rs 5000/- and PB Serial No 123 dated 30/4/2008 for Rs 8000/- not found debited from the individual's IRLA and, hence, recovery of Rs 13,000/- was made accordingly during FSA.

4. During the course of hearing, Counsel for the applicant has placed on record a copy of the Order dated 29/5/2025 passed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal in OA No 03 of 2023 in the case of Dharamvir Vs UOI & Ors, in which a similarly placed petitioner had been granted relief by directing the Respondents to refund the amount of Rs 4,02,295/- recovered at the time of FSA.


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

6. It is evident from the record that the applicant was discharged from service on culmination of his terms of engagement on 31/5/2022 under Rule 13 (3) item III (i). He had rendered 26 years and 28 days of service and was granted service pension for the qualifying service. While in service, the applicant was granted all the three admissible MACPs, the third MACP, ie, Nb Sub Grade, with effect from 04/5/2020. With regard to the recovery effected of Rs 4,95,931/-, the Respondents have submitted that the applicant had been erroneously granted two increments which was detected at the time of FSA in May 2022 and recovered correctly as per laid down and time tested procedure in vogue. Recovery of Rs 18,000/-, was also necessitated at the time of FSA as the amount of Rs 5,000/- drawn on 02/4/2008 against Pay Book Serial No 122 and Rs 8000/- drawn on 30/4/2008 against Pay Book Serial 123 were not found debited.

7. Notwithstanding the above, we deem it appropriate to remit the case back to the Respondents to re-consider the case of the applicant in the light of the Order passed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, on which reliance has been placed by the counsel for the applicant. We expect the Respondents to take a decision in this matter within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order in terms of extant policy and rules/regulations and the ibid Order. The outcome shall be intimated to the Applicant accordingly.


सत्यमेव जयते

8. The OA is disposed off accordingly. No order on costs.

9. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed off.

**(SANJIV MITTAL)** **MEMBER (A)**

cda/-


**(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR)** **MEMBER (J)**

यतो न्यायः ततो जयः