Armed Forces Tribunal
Smt Radha Devi wdo Late Rfn Munga Ram vs UOI & Others on 10 November 2025
**ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, JAIPUR**
28.
**OA No 463/2023 with MA No 781/2023**
Smt Radha Devi, Wd/o No-2854566 Ex Cfn Late Shri Munga Ram, R/o Ward No-10, VPO-Dadiya, District-Sikar (Raj) – 332031
.... Applicant
Versus
1. 1. The Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Govt of India, DHQ PO, New Delhi-110011
2. 2. The Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) Allahabad (UP) – 211014
3. 3. The Officer-in-Charge, Records the Rajputana Rifles, Delhi Cantt, PIN-900746, C/o 56 APO .... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Rameshwar Lal, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Pyare Lal, 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.
**ORDER
10.11.2025**
1. The above Original Application has been filed by the Applicant under the provisions of Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, praying for directing the Respondents to revise Reservist Pension of the Applicants husband from the date the same has fallen below 2/3<sup>rd</sup> of a Sepoy with 15 years net qualifying service to Rs. 11,419/- from 01.07.2014 till his death on 23.01.2017 in terms of Para 155 of Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 (Part-1) and thereafter refix/revise family pension of the Applicant corresponding to the revised Reservist Pension and that the arrears be paid along with interest @ 9% per annum.
2. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the applicant are that the applicant was enrolled in the Army 19.06.1963 and after completion of combined colour and reserve qualifying service of 15 years, he was discharged from Service on 30.06.1978 and was granted Reservist Pension wef 01.07.1978 for life which has been revised from time to time to 2/3<sup>rd</sup> of a Sepoy with 15
years of qualifying service. On implementation of OROP wef 01.07.2014, the minimum pension of a Sepoy with 15 years of service has been fixed @ Rs. 6665/- pm whereas the Reservist Pension has not been revised to Rs. 4443/- wef 01.07.2014 (ie., $\frac{2}{3}^{\text{rd}}$ of Rs. 6665/-) as the Reservist Pensioners were excluded from the revision of pension under OROP policy in terms of Para 4.1 of GoI, MoD letter No 12(1)/2014/D(Pen/Policy)-Part-II dt 03.02.2016 (Para 4.2 of PCDA (P) Circular No 555 dt 04.02.2016). Further, on implementation of 7<sup>th</sup> CPC wef 01.01.2016, in terms of Govt of India, Ministry of Defence letter dt 29.10.2016, the basic pension of pre-01.01.2016 retirees was revised to Rs. 17,129/- pm by applying multiplication factor of 2.57 with the existing basic pension as on 31.12.2015 (ie. Rs. $6665 \times 2.57 = \text{Rs. } 17,129/-$ pm). However, in the case of Reservists, the pension was revised to Rs. 9000/- pm only by applying multiplication factor of 2.57 with Rs. 3500/- pm (ie., Rs. $3500 \times 2.57 = \text{Rs. } 8995/-$ , rounded off to Rs. 9000/-) instead of applying multiplication factor with Rs. 4443/- which comes to Rs. 11,419/- pm. The Applicant has reiterated that in terms of Para 155 of Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 (Part-1), the Reservist Pensioners are entitled to $\frac{2}{3}^{\text{rd}}$ pension of a Sepoy with 15 years of qualifying service, however, their pension has not been revised to $\frac{2}{3}^{\text{rd}}$ of a Sepoy with 15 years of qualifying service. Having been aggrieved, the applicant has filed the OA, praying for relief.
3. The Respondents have filed detailed Reply Statement and while not disputing the basic facts presented by the Applicant, they have submitted that Consequent to issue of Govt of India, Ministry of Defence letter dated 11/11/2008, pension of the applicant was revised to Rs 3500/- wef 01/1/2006, which was further revised to Rs. 9000/- pm wef 01.01.2016 in accordance with Govt of India, Ministry of Defence letter dated 29.10.2016, for which no separate PPO is required to be issued. Further, instructions contained in Circular Nos 501 dated 17.01.2013 and 555 (OROP) dated 04.02.2016 of the PCDA (P) are not applicable to Reservist Pensioners. Therefore, the Applicant is not eligible for revision of Reservist Pension as prayed for. The OA is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed.
1
4. We have heard the counsels for the parties and perused the material placed on record.
5. In this regard, Judgment dated 07/3/2025 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No 6367/2025 (arising out of the final judgment dated 27/9/2024 in CWP No 17046/2024 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh) in the case of UOI & Ors Vs Darshan Singh Bal & Anr, vide which the execution of impugned Order passed by the Hon'ble High Court has been stayed, as also the judgment dated 15/10/2025 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur in the DB Civil Writ Petition No 12723/2024 in the case of UOI & Ors Vs No 1033471 Ex Swr (Reservist) Chiranji Lal, S/o Shri Raju Ram, which are reproduced below:- **Extract from the Order of the Hon'ble Apex Court:-**
"2. Let the notice be issued to the respondents, returnable within four weeks.
3. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order is stayed".
**Extract from the Order of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan:-**
"1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners fairly submits that the controversy can be brought to an end at this juncture by observing that since the controversy is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No 6367/2025 titled as 'Union of India & Ors Vs Darshan Singh Bal', and an interim order is also operating therein, therefore, outcome of the said SLP may govern the field in the present case.
2. Learned Counsel for the Respondent does not oppose the aforesaid proposition.
3. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction that final outcome of the aforementioned SLP pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court shall govern the position of law in the present case. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of".
6. Thus, it is clear that revision of their Reservist Pension is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court and an interim order has been passed staying the implementation of AFT Chandigarh Bench Order (supra) which has been appealed against in that Court. This Tribunal has also disposed off a bunch cases vide Order dated 03/11/2025.
1. 7. In view of the foregoing and since the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court for final adjudication, we deem it appropriate to dispose off this OA with the same direction as given at Para 3 of the ibid Hon'ble High Court Order that the final outcome of the aforementioned SLP pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court shall govern the position of law in the present case as well.
2. 8. OA is disposed off accordingly. Pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, also stand disposed off.
3. 9. No order on costs.
The image shows the Lion Capital of Ashoka, the national emblem of India, which consists of four lions standing back-to-back, with a wheel in the center, topped by a bull and a horse.
(SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A)
(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J)
Ssy/-
The image is a circular seal of the Armed Forces Tribunal. It features a central emblem with a scale of justice and an eagle. The text 'सशस्त्र बल अधिकरण' is written in Devanagari script at the top, and 'ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL' is written in English at the bottom.
मनो न्यायः वनो नयः