Kanchan Dua vs Union Of India

3. The husband of the Appellant was commissioned in the Army in October, 1968. In 1990, he was promoted as a Colonel. When he was posted as the Commandant of 890 2 Animal Transport Battalion in Nowshera, Jammu and Kashmir, he was moved to Rajouri for Operational requirement in Operation Ran Vijay at the location of HQ 25 Infantry Division. In the morning of 25.01.1992, he was found dead in his room. The cause of death was found to be sudden cardiac failure due to high stress and strain. The Appellant was initially granted ordinary family pension and, later special family pension. She made a representation for grant of Liberalised Family Pension. The Appellant complained that the entry in the service record of her husband was wrongfully altered from “Physical casualty under Operation Rakshak” to “Physical casualty”. As there was no response, she filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh seeking alteration of the entry in the service record of her husband from “Physical casualty” to “Physical casualty under Operation Rakshak”. The High Court allowed the Writ Petition and directed the alteration of the service record of the Appellant’s husband to “physical casualty under Operation Rakshak”. Reliance was placed by the High Court on the findings recorded in the Court of Inquiry that the death of the Appellant’s husband was attributable to bona fide military service in the field covered under Operation Rakshak. The High Court further directed the 3 Respondents to consider grant of Liberalised Family Pension to the Appellant.

4. After altering the entry in the service record of the Appellant’s husband from “physical casualty” to “physical casualty under Operation Rakshak”, the Respondents found that the Appellant was not entitled for Liberalised Family Pension. Aggrieved by the rejection of the request for payment of Liberalised Family Pension, the Appellant approached the High Court of Punjab and Haryana by filing a Writ Petition. The said Writ Petition was transferred to the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh. Being of the opinion that cardiac failure does not fall under Category ‘E’ of Part II of the Instructions issued by the Government of India on 31.01.2001, the Tribunal dismissed the Transferred Application of the Appellant. The legality of the judgment of the Tribunal is assailed in these appeals.

12. For the aforementioned reasons, the appeals are dismissed.

10 ..…................................J [L. NAGESWARA RAO] ..…................................J [HEMANT GUPTA] New Delhi, September 23, 2019.

11 Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos. 7525-7526 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.8588-8589 of 2014) SMT. RADHIKA DEVI .... Appellant(s) Versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS.

Leave granted.

15. The Respondents granted Special Family Pension to the Appellant. Unsatisfied with the grant of Special Family Pension instead of the Liberalised Family Pension, the Appellant filed O.A. No.167 of 2011 before the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Branch, New Delhi (for short “the Tribunal”). The Tribunal dismissed the O.A. on 23.11.2011, holding that the Appellant was not entitled to either Liberalised Family Pension or ex- gratia payment. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the Appellant filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Delhi, which was allowed. The High Court found that the Appellant was entitled to Liberalised Family Pension and ex-gratia payment of Rs.5 lakhs. The Appellant challenged the judgment of the High Court to the extent that ex-gratia payment of Rs.7.5 lakhs was not awarded in her favour. The Respondent, Union of India has also filed an appeal questioning the judgment of the High Court in so far as it relates to the declaration that the Appellant is entitled to the Liberalised Family Pension and the award of Rs.5 lakhs as ex-gratia amount.

17. In view of the death of the Appellant due to cardiac failure, the Appellant is not entitled to Liberalised Family Pension. In so far as the payment of ex-gratia amount/ compensation is concerned, we are convinced that the Appellant is entitled to Rs.5 lakhs as ex-gratia compensation in accordance with the Instructions dated 22.09.1998. The special benefits that were granted by the Government of India for ex-gratia payment is payable in all cases of death and 9 Civil Appeal Nos.7459-7460 of 2010 14 disability in service to the family members of the Armed Forces Personnel who died in harness. As the death of the Appellant’s husband was not during enemy action in international war or border skirmishes and action against militants, terrorists, extremists etc., the Appellant is not entitled to Rs.7.5 Lakhs as claimed by her.

18. We set aside the judgment of the High Court declaring that the Appellant is entitled for Liberalised Family Pension. She is entitled only for the Special Family Pension. Further, we uphold the judgment of the High Court that the Appellant is entitled for ex-gratia payment of Rs.5 lakhs. With the above observations, the Appeals are disposed of, accordingly.