New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday (December 3), while dismissing an appeal by the Centre, imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on it for appealing against an order of the Armed Forces Tribunal awarding a widow of a deceased soldier, who died while on an Area Domination Patrol along the Line of Control, awarded a Liberalised Family Pension and other benefits.
A bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih dismissed the appeal of the Centre, saying the widow of the deceased soldier ought not to have been dragged to the top court and the decision-making authority ought to have been sympathetic to the widow of a deceased soldier who died in harness.
Authority ought to have been sympathetic to widow of a deceased soldier who died in harness: Apex Court
“In our view, in a case like this, the respondent (widow of deceased soldier) ought not to have been dragged to this court, and the decisionmaking authority of the appellants ought to have been sympathetic to the widow of a deceased soldier who died in harness. Therefore, we propose to impose costs quantified as Rs.50,000, which will be payable to the respondent,” the bench said.
“Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The directions contained in paragraph 13 of the impugned judgment (Armed Forces Tribunal) shall be implemented within a maximum period of three months from today. We direct the appellants to pay the costs quantified as Rs.50,000 to the respondent within a period of two months from today,” the bench added.
Naik Inderjeet Singh died while on an Area Domination Patrol along the Line of Control
Late Naik Inderjeet Singh was employed in the Indian Army on February 27, 1996 and was part of an Area Domination Patrol, which was launched from Manjit Main to Rangwar Post for domination of the Rangwar gap in the proximity of the Line of Control along the Anti Infiltration Obstacle System (AIOS). A fence built by the Indian Army to prevent cross-border infiltration is known as AIOS.
The deceased complained of breathlessness during duty in extreme climatic conditions from 1.00 am to 3.30 am on January 23, 2013 and he was taken to the nearby Rangwar Post. He could not be air-evacuated due to bad weather and therefore, he was evacuated on foot. He was later declared dead. The cause of death was cardiopulmonary arrest and his death was initially classified as a “battle casualty” but was later classified as a “physical casualty” attributable to military service.
Wife moved Armed Forces Tribunal against denial of Liberalised Family Pension
The wife of the deceased soldier was granted all terminal benefits, including a special family pension but she was denied a Liberalised Family Pension (LFP). She moved the Armed Forces Tribunal, which allowed her application and directed that she be granted Liberalised Family Pension and exgratia lump sum amount payable in case of battle casualties dying in harness.
Centre challenged Armed Forces Tribunal order before apex court
The Centre challenged the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal before the apex court. It said that the Liberalised Family Pension is governed by the order dated January 31, 2001 issued by the Director (Pensions) of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India and it is granted in case of death of an armed forces personnel under the circumstances mentioned in categories D and E of paragraph 4.1 of the order dated January 31, 2001. It further submitted that category D does not apply to the deceased and as the deceased died due to cardiopulmonary arrest, his case was classified as a “physical casualty’ attributable to military service, and, therefore, his widow was paid a special family pension.
Death has occurred as a result of a war-like situation prevailing near Line of Control: Apex Court
The apex court noted that on the date of the death, the deceased was posted with his battalion in Jammu and Kashmir as part of Operation Rakshak and he was part of an Area Domination Patrol for domination of the Rangwar gap in the proximity of Line of Control and was doing duty from 1.00 am to 3.30 am.
“Thus, the death can be attributed to illness caused by extreme climatic conditions. Hence, as per clause 1 (g) of Appendix ‘A’ of the Army Order 1 of 2003, the case will fall in ‘Battle Casualties’. The reason is that the deceased was operating near Line of Control in extreme climatic conditions. He was part of Operation Rakshak and was on duty near Line of Control. The casualty caused by illness due to climatic conditions is covered by clause 1 (g). In this case, the respondent’s husband was a victim of illness caused by extreme climatic conditions. Therefore, the case of the deceased will fall in the category of ‘Battle Casualties’,” the apex court said in its order while concurring with the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal and added, “In this case, the death has occurred as a result of a war-like situation prevailing near Line of Control.”
