Dismissed¶18

Union of India and Ors. v. Vs Rattan Singh Gautam and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Jul 2025CWP/16934/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

War Injury Pension; disability below 20%; Operation Rakshak; permanent disability; invalidment; Ministry of Defence letter dated 31.01.2001; letter dated 30.10.1987; Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) order dated 07.03.2019 upheld; writ petition dismissed for inordinate unexplained delay (filed 2025 against 2019 order); Union of India v. Ex. Hony Lt. Rattan Singh Gautam; CWP No.16934 of 2025; Punjab & Haryana High Court.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the petitioners; the AFT order dated 07.03.2019 (Annexure P-1) granting War Injury Pension stands upheld. ¶18

Union of India and Ors. vs Vs Rattan Singh Gautam and Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the petitioners; the AFT order dated 07.03.2019 (Annexure P-1) granting War Injury Pension stands upheld.

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the War Injury Pension granted by the AFT despite the degree of disability being less than 20% is sustainable, in view of the Ministry of Defence letter dated 31.01.2001 which permits grant of War Injury Pension even where disability is below 20%. +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

In view of the Ministry of Defence letter dated 31.01.2001, if there is no embargo in taking War Injury Pension even if the degree of disability is less than 20%, the War Injury Pension element has to be added.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The instant writ-petition is without any force and the order passed by the AFT-respondent No.2 on 07.03.2019 (Annexure P-1) is upheld.

¶17

Key takeaways

Since the writ-petition was filed in 2025 challenging the order dated 07.03.2019 without any clarification, and no reasons are coming forward for the inordinate delay, the writ-petition has to be dismissed on the count of delay as well.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Sanjeev Prakash Sharma J., oral) dismissed the Union of India's writ petition (CWP No.16934 of 2025, decided 01.07.2025) challenging the Armed Forces Tribunal's order dated 07.03.2019 granting War Injury Pension for life w.e.f. 01.09.2006 to Ex. Hony Lt. Rattan Singh Gautam, who was invalided out of service on account of a war injury sustained during 'Operation Rakshak' causing permanent disability. Holding that, in view of the Ministry of Defence letter dated 31.01.2001, where there is no embargo on grant of War Injury Pension even if the degree of disability is less than 20% at invalidment or reassessment, the War Injury Pension element has to be added, the Court upheld the AFT order. The petition was additionally held liable to be dismissed because it was filed in 2025 against a 2019 order without any clarification or explanation for the inordinate delay.

¶1

144

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CWP No.16934 of 2025 Date of Decision: 01.07.2025

¶4

Union of India and others

¶5

Versus

¶6

JC579327-A Ex. Hony LT. Rattan Singh Gautam and another

¶7

…Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

¶9

Present:Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate, Senior Panel counsel for the petitioners.

¶10

¶11

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA J.(Oral)

¶12

The challenge in this writ-petition is to the order dated 07.03.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.2-Armed Force Tribunal (for short ‘the AFT’) whereby the AFT granted War Injury Pension to the applicant (respondent No.1 herein) for life w.e.f. 01.09.2006 in terms of the letter dated 30.10.1987 which allows grant of War Injury Pension to cases where the degree of disability is assessed as below 20% at the time of invalidment or at any subsequent reassessment stage.

¶13

We notice that the AFT has also taken into consideration the letter dated 31.01.2001 which allows grant of War Injury Pension. It is an admitted position that respondent No.1 was invalided out of service on account of the war injury which occurred during the ‘Operation Rakshak’ resulting in permanent disability.

¶14

SEEMA SHARMA 2025.07.04 12:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶15

CWP No.16934 of 2025 -2-

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the said injury caused during the ‘Opeartion Rakshak’ was less than 20%.

¶17

However, in view of the Ministry of Defence letter dated 31.01.2001, we are of the firm view that if there is no embargo in taking War Injury Pension even if the degree of disability is less than 20%, the said War Injury Pension element has to be added. Accordingly, the instant writ-petition is without any force. The order passed by the AFT-respondent No.2 on 07.03.2019 (Annexure P-1) is upheld. We notice that this writpetition has been filed in the year 2025 challenging the order passed on 07.03.2019 (Annexure P-1) without any clarification. No reasons are coming forward for inordinate delay and the writ-petition has to be dismissed on this count too.

¶18

Accordingly, the present writ-petition is dismissed.

¶19

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE 01.07.2025 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) seema JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶20

SEEMA SHARMA 2025.07.04 12:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Union of India and Ors. v. Vs Rattan Singh Gautam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India and Ors. v. Vs Rattan Singh Gautam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ritu and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Amit Kumar Sharma Vs Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Satish Kumar and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Din Dayal Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sanjeev Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Others

State of Haryana and Others Vs Jitender Kumar