OA 688 of 2012. Case: Surajpal Singh Sangwan Vs Union of India. Armed Forces Tribunal
| Case Number | OA 688 of 2012 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Navdeep Singh, Advocate and For Respondents: Gurpreet Singh, Sr. PC |
| Judges | Vinod Kumar Ahuja, J. (Member (J)) and Lt. Gen. (Retd.) D.S. Sidhu, Member (A) |
| Issue | Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007 - Section 14 |
| Judgement Date | May 05, 2014 |
| Court | Armed Forces Tribunal |
Order:
(Regional Bench At Chandimandir)
-
This is an application filed by the petitioners under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007.
-
Briefly stated the facts of the case as alleged by the petitioners are that the petitioners are all serving Combatants of the Regular Indian Army who are posted to the Border Roads Organisation in highly volatile insurgency affected areas in the State of Jammu and Kashmir but are not being paid and released the Special Compensatory (Counter-Insurgency) Allowance despite the fact that their military allowances are protected while posted to the Border Roads Organisation by virtue of the applicable Regulations No. 17 and 18 of Border Roads Regulations.
-
It was further alleged that the Govt. of India had introduced Field Allowances and Counter Insurgency Allowances in 1994 for members of the Armed Forces while service in field areas and counter-insurgency areas vide Annexures A-3 and A-4 respectively which were further rationalized in the year 2000 vide Annexure A-5. The rates have been regularly revised from time to time thereafter. The petitioners are neither being paid field allowances nor counter-insurgency allowances despite the fact that they are posted in such areas, where Operation Rakshak has been notified by the Government of India.
-
It was further alleged that many personnel of the Regular Army posted to BRO have lost their lives in counter-insurgency designated areas. While the allowance is being released to even personnel posted to Military Engineering Services (MES) who basically have only a role of construction in military areas, it is being refused to the petitioners who are performing tough duties out in the open without the support of sophisticated weaponry which is available to other troops. The risk being faced by the Regular Army personnel posted to BRO is much higher than others since they are operating in the open and are maintaining those very roads and lines in Counter-Insurgency areas which are part and parcel of proper operations. No counter insurgency operations are possible without the role of the units of the petitioners.
-
It was further alleged that the respondents had discontinued the payment of counter-insurgency allowances to Regular Army personnel posted to Border Roads Organisation based on an audit objection inter-alia that civilian personnel posted to BRO were not being paid the said allowances and that such Regular Army personnel had no role in...
To continue reading
Request your trial