Armed Forces Tribunal

Ex Hav Ram Niwas vs UOI & Others on 13 November 2025

Cites 0, Cited by 0

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, JAIPUR

30.

OA No 46/2025 with MA Nos 69/2025 and 445/2025

No-2982411L Ex Hav Ram Niwas, S/o Shri Sanwal Singh, R/o VPO-Dewta, Tehsil-Khetri, District-Jhunjhunu (Raj)

…. Applicant

Versus

1.

The Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Govt of India, New Delhi

2.

The Chief of the Army Stafff, Army Headquarters New Delhi – 110011

3.

The PCDA (P), Draupadi Ghat, Prayagraj (UP)-211014

4.

The OIC Records,

Records The Rajput Regiment, Fatehgarh

…. Respondents

For Applicant

: Mr Harish Maan, Advocate

For Respondents

: Mr Sudesh Chand Sharma, Advocate

CORAM

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MR. SANJIV MITTAL, MEMBER (A)

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…

O R D E R

13.11.2025

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 for grant of MACP-III benefits wef 08.08.2007 and consequential pension and pensionary benefits and that the arrears be paid along with interest @ 12% per annum.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the Applicant was enrolled in the Army on 08.08.1983 and after rendering 24 years and 24 days of service, he was discharged from Service on 31.08.2007 in the rank of Havildar. On completion of 24 years of service, the Applicant was eligible for grant of MACP-III benefits wef 08.08.2007 in terms of Govt of India, Ministry of Defence letter dt 25.07.2018, however, the Applicant has not been granted the benefits of MACP-III. Therefore, the aggrieved Applicant has filed present OA.

3. The Respondents have filed a detailed reply while not disputing the basic facts presented by the Applicant, they have submitted that the Applicant is eligible for grant of MACP-III. On receipt of Application dt 16.02.2024 from the Applicant for grant of MACP-III benefits, the case was taken up with the unit of the Applicant for publication of Part-II Order for grant of MACP-III benefits, who in turn published Part II Order for the same on 05.04.2024. Now, case of the Applicant for grant of MACP-III benefits along with Part II Order and LPC cum Data Sheet has been forwarded to PAO (OR) Rajput Regiment for audit and onward submission to PCDA (P), Prayagraj for issue of Corrigendum PPO. Therefore, the OA has become infructuous and deserves to be dismissed.

4. During the course of arguments, Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant has been granted MACP-III benefits as prayed for, however, interest on the arrears has not been issued for the period from 08.08.2007. On the contrary, Learned Counsel for the Respondents vehemently opposed then contention of the Applicant and submitted that the policy came into existence on 25.07.2018, therefore, the prayer of the Applicant for grant of interest on the arrears before that period is illogical and cannot be acceded to. There are a large number of ex-servicemen and it takes a long time to compile data of all affected pensioners. On receipt of Application from the Applicant, the Respondents have taken immediate steps for publication of Part II Orders and the case has already been processed for the same. Therefore, the plea of the Applicant for grant of interest on the arrears is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed.

5. We have heard Learned Counsels for both the parties and perused the material placed before us.

6. It is not in dispute that the notification for grant of MACP benefits wef 01.01.2006 was issued vide Govt of India letter dt 25.07.2018 and it takes a reasonable long time to compile data of all eligible ex-servicemen. However, the Respondents did not process the case of the Applicant expeditiously after issue of the policy in 2018 and Part II Order for grant of MACP-III benefit was published only on 05.04.2024, ie., after receipt of an Application dt 16.02.2024 from the Applicant. Had the Respondents taken up the case for grant of MACP benefits expeditiously on issue of notification on 25.07.2018, the Applicant would not have availed legal recourse.

7. Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the Respondents to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- to the Applicant as compensation for delayed payment within a period of three months of receipt of a certified copy of this Order in default thereof, the Applicant shall be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum on Rs. 25,000/- till the date of actual payment.

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

9. No order on costs.

(SANJIV MITTAL)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

Ssy/-

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