Advanced Search Results

Ex.Gnr.Naresh Kumar Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Pension

Acts : Army Pension Regulation 1961 - Regulation 173; Entitlement Rules

highlighting that issue of disability pension is to be discussed with reference to Regulation 173 of Army Pension Regulation 1961 (Part-1) which reads as under:- "173.Unless otherwise specifically provided a disability pension consisting of service element and disability

A.K. Malhotra Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; Army Regulation, 1961 - Regulation 16

Reported in : 66(1997)DLT792; 1997(41)DRJ353

(the date of retirement) (Annexure P6). However, a show cause notice was issued on 13.11.92 for action under Regulation 16 of Pension Regulation for the Army (Part-1), 1961. After referring to the Gcm proceedings, it was stated … raised in Cwp 2813/94. (2) The facts : (3) The petitioner was born on 20.5.1938. He later entered Army service and was commissioned in the Army (ASC) on 12.6.60 and was promoted to Selection grade rank of

Ex. Rfn. Hoshiar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Service

Acts : Pay and Allowance Regulation Rules, 1955 - Rule 51; Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 178 and 179; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 34, 38, 39, 80, 91 and 92; Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 311(2); Army Pension Regulations, 1961 - Regulations 173, 186, 187 and 189; Army Regulations - Regulations 178 to 187 and 196 to 200; Defence Services Regulations - Regulations 51 and 123; Civil Services Regulations

Reported in : (2006)144PLR97

of 9 years 263 days, which fell short of 10 years required by the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961, and therefore, he was not entitled to the grant of service element of disability pension. Accordingly a … for a period of 9 years 263 days, which fell short of 10 years required by the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961, and therefore, he was not entitled to the grant of service element of disability

Major Harbans Singh Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Regulations, 1961- Regulation 2

Reported in : ILR1971Delhi326

effect from the date of the said letter i.e. 29th January, 1964. (6) Rule 48 of the Pension Regulations for the Army provides (.hat an officer who is retired from Military service on account of isability which … Secretary, Ministry of defense, regarding his claim for 'disability pension'. (2) The petitioner was commissioned in the Indian Army on 3rd May/21st December, 1947, from the Indian Military Academy, Dehra Dun. After joining the Indian Army, the … November, 1955, and in N.E.F.A. from 12th December, 1959 to 17th December. 1961. (3) In December. 1961, he was commanding 71 Heavy Mortar Bat- tery

Smt. Chongtuokhawi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Guwahati

Subject : ContractCivil

Churachandpur, Manipur in Original (Declaration) Suit No. 4 of 2002 is contrary to the provisions of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 and the same is being challenged by filing a review petition before the same … the amount left by No. 4361900 Sepoy Late Joshua P. Dailoval of 15th Assam Regiment, by way of:(i) Army Group Death benefits Rs. 3,75,000/-(ii) Amount of Arrears of salary Rs. 19,929/-(iii) Amount of Ex-gratia awards Rs. 5,00,000/-(iv)

Shish Ram Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution Of India - Article 136; Army Act, 1950 - Section 20(3); Pension Regulations, 1961 - Regulation 113 (a)

Reported in : 2012(1)SCC290; 2012(1)LLN394; AIR2012SCW1167

could dismiss the appellant was the officer-in-charge of the reservists. In support of this submission, he relied on Regulation 206 of the Defence Services Regulations, 1961. Mr. Hooda next submitted that in any case since the appellant … (for short `the impugned judgment'). 2. The facts very briefly are that the appellant was enrolled in the Army on 28.01.1963. As per the terms of his enrolment, he was to put in not less than ten

Ex Signalman Jagdamba Prasad Dubey Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Pension Regulations, 1961 - Regulation 173; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : 1999(3)AWC2543; (1999)3UPLBEC1756

Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi, respondent No. 1 to take into consideration all the relevant provisions of Regulation 173 of the Army Pension Regulations 1961 and in particular, Appendix-11, contained in paragraph 7 (b) of the … repelled the onslaught of the intruders.3. Now the time has come when the attitude and behaviour of the Army Officers and the Defence Ministry towards soldiers should change. No doubt discipline and stemess is the hall mark

Ex-signalman Shri Bhagwan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the Secreta ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; Army Rules, 1954 - Rule 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13(3), 14, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 to 25 and 27; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 22, 191, 191(2) and 192; Army Pension Regulations, 1961 - Regulations 12, 20, 21, 22, 165, 167, 173, 173A, 183, 185, 187 and 188; defense Service Regulation; Medical Services of the Armed Forces Medical, 1962; General Regulations - Sections 1; Service Pension and Gratuity Regulations - Sections 2 and 3; Disability Pensionary Awards Regulations - Sections 4; Special Pensionary Awards Regulations - Sections 5; Entitlement Rules, 1961 - Rule 7; Army/Air Force Act; Entitlement (Amendment) Rules, 1982; Customs Act, 1962; Central Excises Act, 1944

Reported in : 103(2003)DLT269; 2003(3)SLJ303(Delhi)

which we shall advert to. These include, amongst others.(i) defense Services Regulations - Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 - Part I and II (for short the Pension Regulations). (ii) defense Services Regulations - Regulations for the … Appellant was, nevertheless, denied disability pension.134. The Supreme Court observed in paragraph 5 of the Report that 'No Army Regulation or Rule has been brought to our notice to show that the appellant is not entitled to disability

Anil Nanasaheb Pawar Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 16, 39 and 71; Constitution of India - Article 226; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 58; Army Pension Regulation, 1961 - Regulations 16 and 113

Reported in : 1997(2)BomCR433

of Constitution of India, Section 58 of Evidence Act, 1872 and Regulations 16 and 113 of Army Pension Regulation, 1961 - petition against order of dismissal - petitioner absented from duty without sufficient cause - order of dismissal

Smt. Bashiram Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : CivilInsurance

Acts : Muslim Law; Army Act - Sections 26; Pension Regulations for Army, 1961 - Regulations 216, 219, 220, 227 and 228; Army Group Insurance Fund Rules; AGI Nomination Rules

Reported in : 2004(77)DRJ497

has been produced before us and we have also been taken through the relevant provisions of the Pension Regulations for Army, 1961.9. The questions which arise for consideration in the present writ petition may be set out … Ex-Rfn. Kadar Khan seeking quashing of orders dated 28th March, 2002 and 14th March, 2002 passed by the Army Group Insurance Scheme(Respondent no. 5 in the present petition) informing her that the insurance benefits available to her