O.A. No. 61 of 2014. Case: Ex Honorary Naib Subedar K. Joseph Vs Union of India. Armed Forces Tribunal

Case NumberO.A. No. 61 of 2014
CounselFor Appellant: V.K. Sathyanathan, Adv. and For Respondents: Tojan J. Vathikulam, Central Government Counsel
JudgesShrikant Tripathi, Member (J) and M.P. Muralidharan, AVSM & BAR, NM, Vice Admiral (Member (A))
IssueService Law
Judgement DateAugust 05, 2014
CourtArmed Forces Tribunal


Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J), (Regional Bench, Kochi)

  1. The counsel statement filed on behalf of the respondents is taken on record.

  2. Heard Mr. V.K. Sathyanathan for the applicant and Mr. Tojan J. Vathikulam for the respondents and perused the record.

  3. The applicant, Ex. Hon. Naib Subedar K. Joseph, No. 6270869, claims the benefit of the Government of India, Ministry of Defence, Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare letter No. 17(4)/2008(1)/D (Pen/Policy) dated 11th November 2008, Para 12, which provides additional pension for pensioners of 80 years age and above. The applicant has stated that as per the service record his date of birth was 21st February 1933, but in the PPO, Annexure A-5, a wrong entry of his date of birth was made as 1st January 1935. So, his claim for the additional quantum of pension as per the aforesaid paragraph was denied by the PCDA(P) (3rd respondent) with the assertion that he had not reached the age of 80 years.

  4. Today Mr. Tojan filed a counsel statement and stated in para 4 thereof that, in the service records maintained by the second respondent the applicant's date of birth has been recorded as 21st February, 1933. In this view of the matter, the date of birth pleaded by the applicant is presently not disputed. The same averment had been disclosed even in the letter dated 21 June 2013 (Annexure-A4). In view of the above material evidence available with the second respondent, the date of birth mentioned in the PPO (Annexure-A5) is apparently incorrect. So the same ought not to have been made as the basis to discard the applicant's claim for additional quantum of pension that had become payable on his attaining the age of 80 year, as per para 12 of the Government letter dated 11th...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT