Daily order sheet, C2, 28 Oct 2026 on 28 October 2026

1. Memo of Appearance filed by Shri Rajiv Pandey, Advocate on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be shown as counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Krishan Kumar Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Rajiv Pandey, Ld. counsel for the respondents, both are present before the court.

3. Heard the learned counsel for parties and perused the order

4. O.A. is disposed off. Detailed order on separate sheet of paper.

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Supl. No. 2)

O.A. No. 1077 of 2026 with M.A. No. 1293 of 2026

Smt Ompati Devi widow daughter of Sub Hony Lt Late Jugti Ram Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh and Shri

Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, Advocates

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. Memo of Appearance filed by Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, Advocate on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be shown as counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Shailendra Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, Ld. counsel for the respondents, both are present through video conferencing.

3. On the request of learned counsel for both the parties, list tomorrow i.e. on 29.10.2026.

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Supl. No. 3)

O.A. No. 1078 of 2026

MWO (HFO) Prabhaker Mishra (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh and Shri Nivedita

Singh, Advocates

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Shri JN Mishra, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. Memo of Appearance filed by Shri JN Mishra, Advocate on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be shown as counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present through video conferencing and Shri JN Mishra, Ld. counsel for the respondents is present before the court.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

4. The applicant was enrolled in IAF on 2nd July, 1987 and retired as Master Warrant Officer on 31st May, 2026. At the time of retirement, applicant was issued SPARSH PPO No. 601202602099 from which he came to know that an amount of Rs. 3,49,495/- was deducted from his retiral dues (DCRG and Commutation) as an access amount paid to him under MACP scheme.

5. Learned counsel for respondents submitted that recovery has been made in accordance with law and service rules and is not covered under the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Mashih and others (2015) 4 SCC 334.

6. The matter needs adjudication.

7. Admit.

8. Ld. Counsel for respondents is directed to file counter reply within 4 weeks.

9. Rejoinder Reply may be filed within 02 weeks thereafter.

10. List on 18.12.2026

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Supl. No. 4)

O.A. No. 1079 of 2026 with M.A. No. 1294 of 2026

Ex JWO Awadhnarayan Yadav

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Girish Chandra Tripathi, Shri Sunil Kumar

Mishra, Shri Indra Mani Tripathi and Shri

Krishan Kumar Singh,Advocates

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Shri Ramesh Chandra Sharma, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. Memo of Appearance filed by Shri Ramesh Chandra Sharma, Advocate on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be shown as counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Krishan Kumar Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Shri Ramesh Chandra Sharma, Ld. counsel for the respondents is present through video conferencing.

3. M.A. No. 1294/2026:

This M.A. has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the original application. The cause shown is sufficient to condone the delay. Delay is condoned. M.A No. 1294/2026 stands disposed off.

4. The matter pertains to pensionary benefits. Needs adjudication.

5. Admit.

6. Ld. Counsel for respondents is directed to file counter affidavit within 04 weeks. Rejoinder Reply may be filed within 02 weeks thereafter.

7. List on 19.3.2027

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Supl. No. 5)

O.A. No. 1080 of 2026

Sub Palash Ghosh

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Wg Cdr Ajit Kakkar and Shri Manoj Kumar

Awasthi,Advocates

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. Memo of Appearance filed by Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, Advocate on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be shown as counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

2. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Manoj Kumar Awasthi, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, Ld. counsel for the respondents, both are present before the court.

3. Ld. Counsel for respondent raised objection regarding maintainability of O.A. with regard to territorial jurisdiction of this Bench.

4. We have perused the record. From perusal of record, it transpires that part of the cause of action arose in Rurkee and till now, the applicant is in service. Hence, in view of Section 6 (ii) of AFT Act, this bench is of the view that this bench has territorial jurisdiction to entertain this O.A. Accordingly, objection raised by the ld. Counsel for respondents is rejected and the O.A. is admitted.

5. Ld. Counsel for respondents is directed to file counter affidavit within 04 weeks. Rejoinder Reply may be filed within 02 weeks thereafter.

4. List on 19.3.2027

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Sl. No. 1)

EX-A. No. 212 of 2023 Inre O.A. No. 664 of 2022

Ex Hav Ram Prasad

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Mahendra Kumar Singh, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Shri RKS Chauhan, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Mahendra Kumar Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Shri RKS Chauhan, Ld. counsel for the respondents is present through video conferencing.

2. Heard ld. Counsel for the parties and perused the record. From perusal of record, it transpires that this O.A. was allowed on 2.2.2023 and delay of 6 months and 13 days in DSC service was condoned and respondents were directed to pay the service pension to the applicant. More than 3 years have passed but till now respondents have not complied with the order dated 2.2.2023 passed by this Tribunal. In this regard, recently the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Balakrishnan Mulikote arising out of Diary No. 27246 of 2023 decided on 24.3.2026 has decided the issue. However, a review petition has been filed after a long gap in which no stay order has been passed in favour of the respondents.

3. Considering the delay for non compliance of the order, we impose a cost of Rs. 25,000/- upon the respondets payable by the next date to the applicant. If the cost imposed is not paid by the respondents by the next date, the cost will be doubled.

4. Ld. Counsel for applicant informed that earlier a cost of Rs. 55,000/- was imposed by this Tribunal and out of which only Rs. 40,000/- has been paid and remaining 15,000/- is yet to be paid. Respondents are directed to pay the whole cost to the applicant by the next date.

5. It is also directed that if the compliance has not been done by the next date, then ADG (PS) will appear virtually before this bench to explain as to why contempt proceedings may not be initiated against the respondents and arraying officer.

6. List on 18.3.2027

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Sl. No. 2)

EX-A. No. 256 of 2025 Inre O.A. No. 991 of 2023

Ex Nk Birendra Singh

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri KKS Bisht, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Shri Pushpendra Mishra, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Dharmraj Singh proxy for Shri KKS Bisht, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Shri Pushpendra Mishra, Ld. counsel for the respondents is present through video conferencing.

2. Heard ld. Counsel for the parties and perused the record. From perusal of record, it transpires that this O.A. was allowed on 12.1.2024 and delay in DSC service was condoned and respondents were directed to pay the service pension to the applicant. More than 2 years and 9 months have passed but till now respondents have not complied with the order dated 12.1.2024 passed by this Tribunal. In this regard, recently the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Balakrishnan Mulikote arising out of Diary No. 27246 of 2023 decided on 24.3.2026 has decided the issue. However, a review petition has been filed after a long gap in which no stay order has been passed in favour of the respondents.

3. It is directed that if the compliance has not been done by the next date, then ADG (PS) will appear virtually before this bench to explain as to why contempt proceedings may not be initiated against the respondents and erring officials.

4. List on 18.3.2027

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No.2 (Sl. No. 3)

EX-A. No. 283 of 2025 Inre O.A. No. 574 of 2025

Mrs. Devaki Maya Gurung W/o Late Ex Rfn Dhan Bahadur Gurung Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Col AK Srivastava (Retd), Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, none appeared for the applicant and Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, Ld. counsel for the respondents is present through video conferencing .

2. According to Officer-in-charge, Legal Cell, payment has been made . However, from perusal of PPO, it transpires that payment has been made without interest. In this regard, Officer in charge, Legal Cell requested time to produce the compliance affidavit. He is directed to provide details of payment also along with interest paid thereon if any.

3. List on 25.02.2027.

4. Office is directed to inform the next date to the ld. Counsel for applicant.

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No.2 (Sl. No. 4)

M.A. No. 1265 of 2026 Inre M.A. No. 519 of 2025 Inre O.A. No. 198 of 2024

Vikas Kumar S/o Late Nb Sub DSC Sumer Singh

Applicant

By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Sarvesh Kumar Verma, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Sarvesh Kumar Verma, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, Ld. counsel for the respondents, both are present before the court. Shri Ashish Kumar Singh submitted that he has already filed memo of appearance in this case and the same was taken on record. However, in the cause list, name of Ashish Agnihotri is shown, which may be replaced, if he has already filed memo of appearance on behalf of respondents.

2. Heard ld. Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. From perusal of record, it transpires that original applicant Nb Sub DSC Sumer Singh died on 26.10.2024 and after his death, the O.A. No 198/2024 was decided on 30.1.2025. When the ld. Counsel for the applicant came to know about the death of original applicant in O.A. No. 198/2024, he moved MA. No. 518/2025 for condonation of delay in filing the substitution application and M.A. No. 519/2025 for recall of order dated 31.1.2025 passed in O.A. No. 198/2024 as the order is bad in view of order 22 (6) CPC read with Rule 19 of AFT Procedure (Rule) 2008. Ld . counsel for applicant also moved M.A. No. 520/2025 for substitution of Vikash Kumar as the legal heirs of the deceased applicant. M.A. No. 518/2025 and M.A. No. 520/2025 on 1.8.2025 were allowed without recalling the order dated 31.1.2025. No order regarding condonation of delay and substitution could be passed without recalling the order dated 31.1.2025. Ld. Counsel for both the parties and this bench are in ad idem that first of all, recall application should be allowed and thereafter substitution application and condonation of delay application should be disposed off.

4. To correct the proceeding and procedure of this case, we have heard Misc. Application No. 519/2025 for recall of order dated 31.1.2025 and we are satisfied that as the learned counsel for the applicant was not informed by the legal heirs of the deceased applicant about the death of his father, he was not in a position to inform the court about the factum of death of deceased applicant. This application is also supported by the affidavit and same is allowed. The order dated 31.1.2025 passed in O.A. No. 198/2024 in contravention of order 22 (6) CPC read with Rule 19 of AFT Procedure (Rule) 2008 is hereby recalled and O.A. is restored to its original number. In this regard, order passed by this Bench on 1st August, 2025 is also hereby cancelled in the ends of justice.

5. Heard on M.A. No. 518/2025: This is an application for condonation of delay in filing substitution application and M.A.No. 520/2025 for substitution of Vikas Kumar as legal heirs of the deceased and the fact of the case have already been averred earlier and it is very much clear that applicant died on 26.10.2024 and it was not in the knowledge of the applicant’s counsel and he could not inform the court before passing of the final order and order on merit was passed on 31.2.2025. We find sufficient ground to decide the case on merit and therefore, we are allowing M.A. No. 518/2025 holding that delay was not deliberate and intentional. We also allowing the M.a. No. 520/2025.

6. Ld. Counsel for applicant is directed to correct memo of parties in red ink and also file corrected memo of parties which will be kept just above the original memo of parties.

7. List on 7.1.2027 for final hearing.

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No.2 (Sl. No. 5) O.A. No. 582 of 2025

Hav/AA Chandra Shekhar Singh Yadav

Applicant

By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Dharam Raj Singh, Shri Vishal Bhatnagar

and Shri Ashish Ashthana, Advocates

Versus Union of India &Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Dharam Raj Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, Ld. counsel for the respondents is present through video conferencing .

2. Heard the ld. Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to ld. Counsel for the respondents , he had submitted counter affidavit on 23.10.2026. However, the same is not available on record. As per the registry endorsement dated 14.10.2026, C.A. has not been filed. Registry is directed to do the needful and if the C.A. is filed on 23.10.2026, the same may be kept on file. However, the Rejoinder Reply has already been filed by the ld. Counsel for the applicant.

4. Ld. Counsel for applicant informed that main course will take place in April 2027 and if the case is not heard expeditiously then irreparable loss will be caused to the applicant for non-promotion to the higher post.

5. Ld. Counsel for applicant is directed to provide rejoinder reply to the ld. Counsel for respondents at the earliest.

6. List on 18.12.2026

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Sl. No. 6)

O.A. No. 1034 of 2025

Ex Hav Ran Bahadur Darlami

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri VP Pandey, Shri RK Singh and

Shri Mridul Pandey, Advocates

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Shri Somesh Singh, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri VP Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court and Shri Somesh Singh, Ld. counsel for the respondents is present through video conferencing .

2. Ld. Counsel for respondents submitted that he will file counter affidavit during the course of day. However, copy of C.A. has been handed over to learned counsel for applicant, who may file Rejoinder Reply within 02 weeks.

3. List on 26.2.2027.

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Sl. No. 7)

O.A. No. 164 of 2026

Sub Mujawar Ayyaj Alamgir (Retd)

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Amit Asthana, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Shri GS Sikarwar, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. Case is called out several time, none present for the applicant and Shri GS Sikarwar, Ld. counsel for the respondents is present through video conferencing .

2. Ld. Counsel for respondents submitted that matter has already been settled by the respondents for grant of notional applicant to the applicant and for this reason, ld. Counsel for applicant is not intended to pursue his case any more.

3. Officer –in- charge, Legal Cell has also provided copy of PPO.

4. Since the grievance of the applicant has already been redressed by the respondents, O.A. has become infructous.

5. Accordingly, O.A. is dismissed as having become in-fructous. PPO provided by the Officer-in charge- Legal Cell is taken on record.

6. No order as to costs.

7. MAs, if any pending in this O.A. also stands disposed off.

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No.2 (Sl. No. 8)

O.A. No. 322 of 2026

Air Cmde Sameer Pradhan

Applicant

By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Yashpal Singh and Shri Anurag Vikram,

Advocates

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Sunil Sharma, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Yashpal Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is present before the court None present for the respondents..

2. It is informed by one of the counsel that Sri Sunil Sharma, ld. Counsel for respondents is deputed as Returning Officer in Avadh Bar Election held today, therefore, he is unable to attend the court and advance his argument.

3. List on 13.11.2026.

HLS/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW Court No.2 (Sl. No. 9)

O.A. No. 1239 of 2024

Lt Col Pallavi Verma

Applicant

By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri Yashpal Singh, Advocate

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents : Shri Amit Jaiswal, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Yashpal Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant is physically present. However, Shri Amit Jaiswal, Ld. counsel for the respondents was present virtually on earlier occasion.

2. In pursuance of order dated 23.10.2026, this case has been preponed for hearing today i.e. 28.10.2026. We have heard the learned counsel to some extent. Sri T.B. Pillai, Lt. Col MS (Legal) branch, who is virtually present, submitted that the applicant’s board is not scheduled to be held in the month of October, 2026. He further submitted that three opportunities have already been provided to her in which the applicant was not selected. According to Sri Pillai if this O.A. is allowed by this Tribunal, special board will be held in future for consideration her claim for promotion to the rank of Col.

3. List on 08.01.2027.

Rpm/-Girish/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Sl. No. 10)

O.A. No. 268 of 2025

Ex Nk Bishamber Dutt

Applicant By Legal Practitioner for the Applicant : Shri VP Pandey and Shri RK Singh, Advocates

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Shri Arvind Kumar Pandey & Mohd. Zafar Khan

Advocates Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri VP Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Shri Arvind Kumar Pandey, and Mohd. Zafar Khan Ld. counsel for the respondents are present.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. O.A. is allowed.

4. Detailed order on separate sheet of paper.

5. MA(s) if any, pending for disposal shall be treated to have been disposed of.

Rpm/-Girish/-

ORDER SHEET ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 2(Sl. No. 11)

O.A.(A). No. 1245 of 2023

Sep Raj Karan Singh (Dismissed)

Appellant By Legal Practitioner for the Appellant : Shri Ravi Kumar Yadav and

Shri Saurabh Yadav, Advocates

Versus Union of India & Others

Respondents By Legal Practitioner for Respondents: Shri Namit Sharma, Advocate Notes of the Registry

1. On the case being taken up for hearing, Shri Ravi Kumar Yadav, Ld. Counsel for the appellant is physically present. However, Shri Namit Sharma, Ld. counsel for the respondents is virtually present.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents seeks accommodation of the case. Hence, the case is adjourned for the day.

3. List on 29.04.2027.

Rpm/-Girish/-