Armed Forces Tribunal

Ex Hav Shambhu Singh vs UOI & Others on 20 November 2025

Cites 0, Cited by 0

14.

Versus

No-15140071L Ex Hav Shambhu Singh, S/o Late Shri Jawahar Singh, R/o Plot No-125, Sainikpuri, Digari Kallan, District-Jodhpur (Raj) -342015

OA No 275/2024 with MA No 405/2024

The Union of India, through its Secretary of the Govt of India, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi - 110011

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, JAIPUR

(CIRCUIT BENCH AT JODHPUR)

The Chief of the Army Staff, Army Headquarters, DHÌ PO, New Delhi - 110011

The PCDA (Pension), Draupadi Ghat,

Prayagraj (UP) - 211014

Arty Records, PIN-908802, C/o 56 APO

For Applicant

For Respondents

CORAM

: Mr DS Rathore, Advocate

:Mr Tribhuwan Singh, Advocate

....

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

ORDER

20.11.2024 .... Applicant Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR, MEMBER (J) HON'BLE MR SANJIV MITTAL, MEMBER (A)

1. By way of this Application under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has prayed for directing the Respondents for qrant of MACP-III benefits wef 01.09.2023 in terms of Para 18(a) of Pension Regulations for the Army, 2008 (Part-1) and that the arrears be paid along with interest @ 8% per annum.

2. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the Applicant are that the Applicant was enrolled in the Army on 11.08.1999 and after rendering 24 years and 21 day of Service, including 48 days of Non-Qualifying Service (NÌS) on account of absent without leave, he was discharged from Service on 31.08.2023 and, accordingly the Applicant has been granted Service Pension OA No 275/2024 Ex Hav Shambhu Singh Vs UOI& Ors for life wef 01.09.2023 for qualifying service on 23 years, 11 months and 3 days of Service. The Applicant submits that as per Rule 18 (a) of Pension Regulations for the Army, 2008 (Part-1), in calculating the length of qualifying service, fraction of a year equal to three months and above but less than 6 months shall be treated as a completed one half year and reckoned as qualifying service. Hence, 23 years, 11 months and 3 days of qualifying service rendered by the Applicant should be counted as completed 24 years and, accordingly, the Applicant should be extended the benefits of MACP-III wef 01.09.2023. Further, under the provisions of Rule 49 of the aforesaid Pension Regulations, the Competent Authority may condone a deficiency of service in a particular rank not exceeding three months in the case of discharge at own request on compassionate grounds. However, under this provision also, the competent authority has not condoned the deficiency of just 27 days for grant of MACP-III benefits. The Applicant issued Legal Notice to the Respondents for condonation of deficiency of 27 days of qualifying service for grant of MACP-III benefits by the Respondents. The Applicant made representations as also issued Legal Notice for grant of Service Pension after condonation of shortfall of Service, but to no avail. Therefore, the aggrieved Applicant has filed present OA.

The Respondents have filed a detailed Reply Statement and while not disputing the basic facts presented by the Applicant, they have submitted that in terms of Para 21(ii) of Pension Regulations for the Army, 2008 (Part-1), the absence period of 48 days has been treated as non-qualifying service (NOS) and cannot be counted towards grant of pensionary benefits. Accordinaly. the Applicant has been granted Service Pension for qualifying service of 23 vears, 11 months and 03 days and there is a shortfall of 27 days to complete 24 years of service. Further, as per Para 21 (i) of aforesaid Pension Regulations, any period of absence without leave which is regularized as Extra Ordinary Leave (EOL) without pay and allowance is treated as NÌS. In the present case, the Applicant has not completed 24 years of qualifying service, therefore, he is not eligible for MACP-III benefits wef 01.09.2023 and the said O4 No 275/2024 Ex Hav Shambhu Singh Vs UOI & Ors period cannot be regularized at this stage. Moreover, on scrutiny of Sheet Roll/ARPAN, it is found that Part II Order regarding grant of 3rd MACP wef 11.08.2023 (ie., on completion of 24 years of service), had been published vide 1 Medium Regiment Part II Order No 0/1252/0004/2023 which was not in order in terms of the Policy in vogue and, hence, the Unit of the Applicant has been directed to cancel above Part II Order. In view of the aforesaid averments, the Learned Counsel for the Respondents have reiterated that the OA is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed.

4. During the course of arquments, in support of his claim, the Applicant has supplied copies of AFT (RB), Chennai Oorder dt 23.11.2017 in OA No 108/2016 in the case of Ex Hav M. Sankarraj Vs UoI & Ors and AFT (PB), new Delhi Order dt 25.07.2023 in OA No 2099/2021 in the case of Hav Vijay Kumar (Retd) s UOI & Ors, wherein the similarly placed persons have been allowed the benefits of MACP after condonation of deficiency in service and prayed that the Respondents may be directed to decide the case of the Applicant in the light of aforesaid judgments.

We have heard Learned Counsels for both the parties and perused the documents placed on record.

6. Grant of Pension/Gratuity and MACP benefits are two distinct issues and the provisions of Pension Regulations cannot be applied to the provisions of MACP scheme. Pension Regulations provide for the provisions for grant of pension and pensionary benefits for the service rendered by a person wherein there are specific provisions for condonation of shortfall of service for grant of pensionary benefits, whereas the MACP Scheme is a special provision which is granted after completion of a specific period of service and there is no provision in the MACP Scheme to condone the shortfall of qualifying service for grant of MACP and, hence, such a prayer is rejected.

7. As per the citation placed on record by the Counsel for the Applicant wherein provisions under Pension Regulations have been applied to MACP OA NO 275/2024 Ex Hav Shambhu Singh Vs UOI & Ors Scheme, we direct that if the Applicant makes a fresh representation with regard to his prayer in the OA within a period of one month of receipt of a certified copy of this Order, the Respondents shall examine the case of the Applicant for grant of MACP-III benefits by condoning the shortfall under Pension Regulations (since there is no such provision under MACP Scheme) within a period of four months thereafter in accordance with extant rules/regulations and policies and the outcome thereof shall be intimated to the Applicant.

8. The OA is disposed off accordingly. Pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, also stand disposed off.

9. No order on costs. (SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A) Ssy/ (GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J) OA No 275/2024 Ex Hav Shambhu Singh Vs UOI & Ors

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead