Dismissed¶18

Union of India and Others v. Smt Ram Pyari

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Jul 2025CWP/17935/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP No.17935 of 2025; Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh; decision dated 03.07.2025; Union of India v. Smt. Ram Pyari; disability pension broad-banding; enhancement of disability element from 30% to 50%; DSC service; dual family pension w.e.f. 24.09.2012 for life; service element up to 10.05.2006 (death of husband); Armed Forces Tribunal order dated 08.02.2019 upheld; Bijender Singh vs. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 895 followed; Union of India vs. Ram Avtar, 2014 SCC Online SC 1761 relied upon; implementation within two months; writ petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; AFT order dated 08.02.2019 upheld and directed to be implemented within two months; pending misc. application(s), if any, disposed of. ¶18

Union of India and Others Vs Smt Ram Pyari — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition dismissed; AFT order dated 08.02.2019 upheld and directed to be implemented within two months; pending misc. application(s), if any, disposed of.

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the Armed Forces Tribunal erred in enhancing the disability element of disability pension from 30% to 50% in respect of DSC service.

¶17

Court's answer

In terms of Bijender Singh vs. Union of India and others, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 895, which affirms Union of India and others vs. Ram Avtar, 2014 SCC Online SC 1761, enhancement of disability pension stands approved at 50% where the disability is less than 50%, 75% where the disability is from 50% to 75%, and 100% where the disability is more than 75%.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The contention that the AFT ought not to have enhanced the disability element from 30% to 50% is rejected; the writ petition is dismissed and the AFT's order dated 08.02.2019 is upheld.

¶18

Key takeaways

The impugned AFT order shall be implemented within a period of two months from the date of this judgment.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J., oral) dismissed the Union of India's CWP No.17935 of 2025 challenging the Armed Forces Tribunal's order dated 08.02.2019, by which the applicant (widow of a DSC serviceman) was held entitled to disability element @ 50% against 30% disability w.e.f. 01.05.1996 for one year, service element of disability pension up to 10.05.2006 (date of death of her late husband), and dual family pension w.e.f. 24.09.2012 for life, with arrears payable within three months failing which interest @ 8% p.a. Relying on Bijender Singh vs. Union of India and others, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 895, which affirms Union of India and others vs. Ram Avtar, 2014 SCC Online SC 1761 (broad-banding of disability pension: 50% where disability is below 50%, 75% where it is 50%–75%, and 100% where it exceeds 75%), the Court rejected the contention that the AFT ought not to have enhanced the disability element from 30% to 50% for DSC service, upheld the AFT order, and directed its implementation within two months; pending misc. application(s) stood disposed of.

¶1

134

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CWP No.17935 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.07.2025

¶4

Union of India and others

¶5

…Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

Smt. Ram Pyari and another

¶8

…Respondents

¶9

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

¶10

Present:Mr. Ashish Chaudhary, Senior Panel Counsel, UOI for the petitioners.

¶11

¶12

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)

¶13

Learned Armed Forces Tribunal (for short ‘the AFT’) passed an order dated 08.02.2019 in a way directing as under:-

¶14

“ The Original Application is, accordingly, allowed and applicant is held entitled for the Life Time Arrear of service element of DSC service and disability element @ 50% against 30% disability w.e.f. 01.05.1996 for one year and service element of disability pension upto 10.05.2006, that is, date of death of her late husband and thereafter dual family pension with effect from 24.09.2012 for life. The respondents are directed to calculate the arrears accordingly and to pay the same to the applicant within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order by the learned counsel for the respondents/OIC, Legal Cell, failing which the arrears carry an interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of this order.”

¶15

NEETU RANI 2025.07.14 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD

¶16

CWP No.17935 of 2025 -2-

¶17

The challenge by learned counsel for the petitioners-UOI is that learned AFT ought not to have enhanced the disability element from 30% to 50% for the DSC service.

¶18

However, in terms of the judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bijender Singh vs. Union of India and others, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 895 , which affirms the earlier judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others vs. Ram Avtar 2014 SCC Online SC 1761 , approving the enhancement of disability pension to 50% where the disability is less than 50%, 75% where the disability is from 50% to 75% and 100% where the disability is more than 75%, we are unable to accept the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners and we dismiss the present writ petition upholding the order passed by the AFT. The impugned order shall, now, be implemented within a period of two months from today.

¶19

Pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶20

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

¶21

03.07.2025 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) neetu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶22

NEETU RANI 2025.07.14 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD

Union of India and Others v. Smt Ram Pyari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India and Others v. Smt Ram Pyari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of India and Ors. Vs Ex Sub Maj (Hony Capt) Ram Chander and Anr.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Ex Cfn Raj Singh and Another

State of Haryana and Others Vs Vijayant Kumar and Another

Ajit Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others

Union of India and Ors. Vs No 15176327N Ex Nk Deen Dayal and Another

Sushil Kumar Vs Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited through Its Managing Director and Others