Union of India Vs Nk Kripal Singh — Uttarakhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Union of India Vs Nk Kripal Singh — Uttarakhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition directed against the Armed Forces Tribunal's order dated 18.03.2025 in O.A. No.890 of 2024 (granting second service pension in DSC after condoning a shortfall of 10 months and 25 days in qualifying service) should be allowed or dismissed. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the concession, the instant writ petition is dismissed.

Ratio / Principle

The controversy in the writ petition stands concluded by Paragraph 41 of the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India & others vs. Balakrishnan Mullikote (Civil Appeal arising out of Diary No(s). 27246/2023), as very fairly conceded by learned counsel for both parties.

Key takeaways

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Union of India's writ petition against the Armed Forces Tribunal (Regional Bench, Lucknow, Circuit Bench at Nainital) order dated 18.03.2025 in O.A. No.890 of 2024 — by which the Tribunal allowed the respondent's claim, condoned a shortfall of 10 months and 25 days in minimum qualifying service, and held him entitled to second service pension in the DSC in addition to his Army pension, restricting arrears to three years preceding 09.09.2024 per Shiv Dass vs. Union of India (2007 (3) SLR 445) and directing implementation within four months, failing which interest @8% per annum — was dismissed. Learned counsel for both sides very fairly conceded that the controversy stood concluded by Paragraph 41 of the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India & others vs. Balakrishnan Mullikote (ex Hav 256812 M) (Civil Appeal arising out of Diary No(s). 27246/2023), under which respondents are entitled to condonation of shortfall in qualifying service up to one year per Paragraph 125 of the Pension Regulations, 1961 and Paragraph 44 of the Pension Regulations, 2008, qualifying service being determined per Paragraphs 9 and 18 of the respective Regulations and Note 5 to the letter dated 30th October 1987. Per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J. (bench: Subhash Upadhyay, J.); pending applications disposed of.

2026:UHC:3391-DB

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA

AND

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY 0 5 TH MAY, 2026 WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 270 OF 2025

Union of India & others …...Petitioners.

Versus

NK Kripal Singh ….Respondent.

Counsel for the Petitioners : Mr. Rajesh Sharma, learned Standing Counsel. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. M.S. Bhandari, learned counsel. JUDGMENT : ( per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)

The instant writ petition is directed against the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow, Circuit Bench at Nainital, dated 18.03.2025 in O.A. No.890 of 2024. The operative part of the order is as

follows:-

“7. Accordingly, Original Application is allowed. The shortfall of 10 months and 25 days in minimum qualifying service of the applicant in getting second service pension is condoned. Applicant is held entitled to get second service pension in DSC as well in addition to pension which he is already getting from the Army.

8. The respondents are directed to grant second service pension to the applicant from the next date of discharge from DSC service. However, due to law of limitations settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shiv Dass vs. Union of India , reported in 2007 (3) SLR 445, the arrears of second service pension will be restricted to three years preceding the date of filing of the instant Original Application. The date of filing of this Original Application is 09.09.2024. The respondents are

1

2026:UHC:3391-DB

directed to give effect to this order within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Default will invite interest @8% per annum till actual payment.”

Learned counsel for the parties very fairly concede that the controversy is concluded by Paragraph 41 of the judgment of Supreme Court in Civil Appeal, arising out of Diary No(s). 27246/2023, “Union of India & others vs. Balakrishnan Mullikote (ex Hav 256812 M)” , wherein it has been held as follows:-

“41. Accordingly, this Court holds that the Respondents are entitled to condonation of shortfall in qualifying service up to one (1) year, in accordance with Paragraph 125 of the Pension Regulations, 1961 and Paragraph 44 of the Pension Regulations, 20058 after determining the length of qualifying services in accordance with Paragraphs 9 and 18 of the Pension Regulations of 1961 and 2008, respectively, as well as Note 5 appended to the letter dated 30^th October 1987.”

In view of it, the instant writ petition is

dismissed.

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.

SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.

Dated: 05^th May, 2026 NISHANT

NISHANT KUMAR Digitally signed by NISHANT KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=ad3fcb5ca64340f5dd0a4c574afa0fd63133605ca57cdc00ec2b7462b452b326, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=7E81318F3B1BE7EAAC9370185F7C9C20892BC63A055CFD1961690560487E670C, cn=NISHANT KUMAR Date: 2026.05.06 11:32:22 +05'30'

2