Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. The instant matter has been received on remand from the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala vide its order dated 15th January 2014 in O.P.(AFT)No.01 of 2014(Z). 3. As per the record, The applicant, Ex Sapper, V.P.Thankachan, No.1354891 claims disability pension with effect from the date of his discharge. He was enrolled in the Indian Army on 31st July 1971. During the service he developed a psychic problem, so he was examined by the Invaliding Medical Board which diagnosed that he was suffering from the disability Neurosis (Anxiety) and assessed the same at 40% for life. He was accordingly medically boarded out of the service on 7th of December 1980. As the applicant had rendered only 9 years and 98 days service, he was found ineligible for the service pension because the minimum requisite qualified service to earn service pension was 15 years at that point of time. The applicant, however, set up a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. Heard Smt.Thara Thamban for the applicant and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record. 2. The respondents did not file any reply statement, so we proceeded to decide the matter on the basis of the Annexures filed on behalf of the applicant. 3. The applicant, K.M.George, Ex-L-Tel.No.47813, claims reservist pension. He was enrolled in the Indian Navy for 10 years regular and 10 years Fleet Reserve Service. He served the Navy in the Boy's service till 6th June 1957 for 1 year and 98 days. After the Boy's service, he continued in the service of the Indian Navy from 7th June 1957 and was ultimately discharged from the active service on 6th June 1967 with the reserve liability of 10 years from 7th June 1967. He was accordingly transferred to the fleet reserve and remained as such till 19th June 1976 and was issued service certificate with regard to his service in the Fleet Reserve. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. Counsel statement filed on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. 2. Heard Mr.Ramesh C.R for the applicant and Mr.Tojan J. Vathikulam for the respondents and perused the record. 3. The applicant, Gangadharan M.V., Ex Lance Naik No.13944082K, claims the benefit of rounding off of the disability pension in terms of the Government of India, ministry of Defence letter No.1 (2)/97/D(Pen-C) 31st January, 2001. 4. The facts relevant for the decision of the instant matter are that, the applicant was enrolled in the Indian Army on 6th of October, 1977 as Sepoy and was discharged on 1st of November 1994. After the discharge from the Army, he was re-enrolled in the Defence Security Corps on 29th March 1997 for a term of engagement of ten years with the liberty to claim further extension of five years or till attaining the age of 55 year, whichever was earlier. The applicant was discharged from the D.S.C service on completion of his initial term of engageme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. The applicant, M.K. Mishra, Ex POELP No. 169764-B filed this Original Application (appeal) challenging the verdict of the Court Martial, whereby he was found guilty of the charge under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 77(2) of the Navy Act, 1957 and was accordingly dismissed from the service. 2. In this order we will not disclose the identity of the victim and so she will be referred to as the 'victim'. The names of her parents will also not be disclosed and they will be referred to as 'father' or 'mother', as the case may be. 3. The story leading to the trial of the applicant is that on 9th February, 2008 at about 15.50 hrs., he met the victim and her sister, while they were going to the shopping complex at Sailors Married Accommodation for recharging their mobile phone. He offered them a lift to the shopping complex. Both the victim and her sister accepted his offer as they were taking tuition along with his daughter with the sa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. Heard Mr.T.R.Renjith for the applicant and Mr. Tojan.j.Vathikulam for the respondents and perused the record. 2. The applicant K.R.Santhini, who is the wife of T.Veeranna, ex Sailor No.145746-T, claims the civil death of her husband and in consequence thereof she further claims family pension. 3. According to the Original Application, the husband of the applicant was not known since 2002, so as per Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, his civil death was required to be presumed. But the respondents had not done so, so, she filed the instant Original Application. 4. It is also noteworthy to mention that the applicant had earlier filed Writ Petition No.18509 of 2005 in the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, at Ernakulam, which was disposed of on 1st of August, 2005 with the direction to the applicant to approach the Civil Court for declaration of the factum of civil death of her husband. Accordingly, she filed O.S.No. 80 of 2011 in the Court of Munsiff at ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. Heard Mr.V.K.Sathyanathan for the applicant and Mr.K.M.Jamaludheen for the respondents and perused the record. 2. The applicant Lt.Col.G.S.Pillai (retired) No.16538 L filed the instant Original Application (Appeal) under Section 15 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act for quashing the entire GCM proceedings held against him and also for setting aside the findings and sentence finally recorded by the Chief of the Army Staff vide his order dated 21st September 2011 (Annexure A10). 3. The applicant was tried by the General Court Martial (hereinafter referred to as the GCM) in respect of the following five charges; namely:- (1) Under Section 69 of the Army Act, for committing a civil offence, that is to say, being a public servant, obtaining for himself a gratification other than legal remuneration as a reward for doing an official act, contrary to Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in that he, at Suratgarh, during Mar 2007, while performing ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. Heard Mr. E.M. Joseph for the applicant and Smt. E.V. Moly for the respondents and perused the records. 2. The original applicant T.B. Habib, Ex Sepoy, No. 6601850, filed the instant Original Application for a direction to the respondents to sanction and pay him disability pension with effect from the date of his discharge. He died on 5th January, 2012, during the pendency of the case, and his widow, Amina Ammal, the present applicant, is pursuing the matter as his legal representative. The present applicant, therefore, claims not only disability pension payable to the original applicant, Habib, during his life time, but also claims family pension with effect from the date of his death. 3. The original applicant, T.B. Habib, was enrolled in the Army on 18th February 1961 and was invalidated out of service with effect from 5th August 1969 on the recommendation of the Invaliding Medical Board, which opined that he was suffering from the disability hyperh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. Heard Mr.V.K.Sathyanathan for the applicant and Mr.P.J.Philip for the respondents and perused the record. 2. By the instant Original Application filed under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, the applicant Corporal Ravikumar, No.920220S has prayed for a direction to the respondents to allow him to continue in occupation of the residence TMQ.No.P-51/8, AF Campus, Hebbal, J.C.Nagar Post, Bangalore till he is allotted with a Permanent Service Married Accommodation as per his seniority on the roll of the respondents. He has further prayed for quashmentof orders Annexures A2, A6, A7, A9 and A10. 3. The relevant facts are that the applicant was allotted the aforesaid accommodation and in pursuance of the allotment he occupied the same. Someone else made a complaint in writing that the allotment made in favour of the applicant was bad in view of the fact that he was not entitled to Married Accommodation as he was below 25 years of age. In this conne...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. The applicant, Komalam N.B., widow of late Havildar Dinesh K.P., filed Writ Petition No.12741 of 2008 and W.P. (C)No. 7174 of 2009 in the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam based on almost the same cause of action arising on unnatural death of her husband at the duty station. The first Writ Petition, W.P. (C). No. 12741 of 2008, was filed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to sanction and pay her special family pension as per the Rules with effect from the date of death of her husband along with 12% interest. She further claims for education and health allowance for the benefit of her minor daughter. By the second Writ Petition, i.e. W.P.(C) No. 7174 of 2009, the applicant prayed for quashing of the Court of Inquiry, Ext. P11. In addition, she claims an amount of Rs.9 Lakhs as compensation due to the death of her husband in mysterious circumstances at the place of posting. 2. After the establishment of this Bench of the Armed Forces Tribun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Vadm M.P. Muralidharan, Member (A): 1. The first applicant is a registered Association of Ex Navy Direct Entry Artificers and the other four are all Ex Direct Entry Artificers of the Navy (hereinafter referred to as the applicants). The applicants two to five, were discharged from the Navy after their initial engagement period of 10 years. As per applicants, they were placed 10 years in Fleet Reserve. The applicants were not given pension on their release from service, but have now sought pension based on the fact that they were placed in Fleet Reserve for 10 years and 50% of the period of reserve would accrue towards pension. While a request for pension was made by the applicants (Annexure A5) to Respondent No.2, vide Annexure A6 they were informed by Respondent No.3 that they were not eligible for pension. The applicants have therefore prayed for setting aside the IHQ, MOD (Navy) letter No.PN/8126/12 dated 25 June 2012 (Annexure A6) denying them pension. They have also prayed to decl...
Tag this Judgment!