“Delay Not Fatal When Authority Erred”: Delhi High Court Orders Full Family Pension Arrears For Widow Of Soldier Who Died In 1978
The Delhi High Court has upheld an order of the Armed Forces Tribunal, directing the Central government to pay arrears of special family pension to the widow of an army personnel, who died back in 1978.
Though the widow had challenged denial of special family pension only in the year 2015, the High Court observed that such delay would not be fatal when the Pension Sanctioning Authority itself erred in denying her the benefit despite the Court of Inquiry finding her husband's death attributable to military service.
“Strangely, the Pension Sanctioning Authority, on 5 March 1979 rejected the respondent's claim for Special Family Pension on the ground that the death of Puran was not attributable to military service. We fail to understand how such a conclusion could have been arrived at, in the face of the finding, to the contrary, of the COI,” a division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla said.
The development comes in a writ preferred by the Centre against AFT order.
Respondent-widow's husband had died on service due to an electric shock, prompting her to apply for grant of Special Family Pension in 1979 itself.
“Strangely”, the Court noted, the Pension Sanctioning Authority rejected the respondent's claim and granted her ordinary family pension. She was also informed of her right to appeal against this decision within six months, which remedy she did not avail.
However, in 2015, the Respondent appealed seeking Special Family Pension, which came to be allowed. But the benefit was made effective from 12 October 2015.
The respondent then petitioned AFT, praying for arrears of Special Family Pension, from the date of the death of her husband, i.e., for the period 30 April 1978 to 11 October 2015 with interest. This appeal came to be allowed. Hence, this plea.
Upholding the AFT order, The High Court observed,
“Petitioner ought to have released Special Family Pension to the respondent immediately on the COI returning a finding that the death of Puran was attributable to military service. We are unable to understand how, even in the face of the said finding, the claim of the respondent for Special Family Pension was rejected on 5 March 1979 on the ground that death of Puran was not attributable to military service. It goes without saying that the Pension Sanctioning Authority cannot sit in appeal over the decision of COI. Thus, as the petitioner had committed a serious error on 5 March 1979, we do not regard the delay on the part of the respondent in re-approaching the petitioner for Special Family Pension, to be fatal to her case.”
It relied on SK Mastan Bee v General Manager South Central Railway & Anr (2003) where the Supreme Court had held that the right to receive Special Family Pension is a constitutional right of the applicant whose late husband expired during discharge on bonafide military duty and the demise of the late husband of the applicant was attributable to military service.
Stating that the decision in Mastan Bee squarely covers the case at and, the High Court dismissed Centre's plea.
Appearance: Mr. Prajesh Vikram Srivastava, SPC and Mr. Dipanshu Sharma, Adv with Major Anish Muralidhar, Army
Case title: Union of India v. Smt. Guddi Bisht W/O Late Hav Puran Chandra Singh Bisht
Case no.: W.P.(C) 16268/2025