O.A. No. 62 of 2013. Case: A. Srinivasan, Lt. Col. (Retd.) Vs Union of India, Through the Secretary, The Additional Directorate General Territorial Army and The Controller General of Defence Accounts. Armed Forces Tribunal

Case NumberO.A. No. 62 of 2013
CounselFor Appellant: M.K. Sikdar & S. Biju and For Respondents: Mr. B. Shanthakumar, SPC
JudgesV. Periya Karuppiah, Member (J) and Anand Mohan Verma, Member (Ad.)
IssueService Law
Judgement DateOctober 10, 2013
CourtArmed Forces Tribunal


V. Periya Karuppiah, Member (J), (Regional Bench, Chennai)

  1. This application has been filed by the applicant praying for production of the records in respect of the impugned order No. UO No. 5662/AT-P/Vol. XVI dated 21.3.2013, regarding rejection of Territorial Army pension passed by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to grant Territorial Army pension to the applicant with effect from 1.1.2009 with interest and with consequential monetary benefits and to cease the civil pension thereafter and to pass further orders. Heard Mr. M.K. Sikdar, Learned Counsel for the applicant and Mr. B. Shanthakumar, Learned Senior Panel Counsel assisted by Major Suchithra Chellappan, Learned JAG Officer on behalf of the respondents.

  2. The Learned Counsel for the applicant was addressing the arguments on the basis of the pleadings raised in the application and while submitting the points related to the prayer, he had referred that the applicant was aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent dated 21.3.2013 and it ought to have been quashed and he been granted with Territorial Army pension as prayed for in the application. He had also referred to a subsequent letter No. 66177/TA-41953/TA-4 dated 12.6.2013, sent by the Additional Directorate General Territorial Army, GS Branch, IHQ of MoD (Army), New Delhi, to CGDA, Delhi Cantonment-10, which was also marked copy to the applicant for information sake. In the said letter, we could find that the applicant's plea for the grant of Territorial Army pension was requested to be considered as a fresh case without any further delay. The Learned Senior Panel Counsel could not comment upon the letter dated 12.6.2013 sent to CGDA, Delhi Cantonment. The said letter was no doubt on the representation of the applicant towards the grant of pension from Territorial Army. In the impugned order challenged by the applicant, the Controller General of Defence Accounts, Delhi Cantonment, wrote to Ministry of Defence on 21.3.2013 that the 'Ministry may like to consider the case on merit and grant him pension from army side, which...

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