Case Note & Summary
The writ petition was filed by the Union of India and other defence authorities under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chennai dated 11.09.2023 in O.A.No.157 of 2022. The respondent, a former Subedar discharged from the regular army on 31.10.1997 after 28 years of service, had been receiving service pension. He approached the Tribunal seeking stepping up of his pension to match that of territorial army pensioners, relying on a reply received under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The Tribunal allowed his application. The petitioners contended that the application was filed after a delay of about seven years, that an RTI reply does not furnish a cause of action, and that the rules governing regular army and territorial army pensions are distinct and different. They further argued that the respondent’s claim was vague as it did not specify any particular comparator. The Court, after hearing both sides and examining the records, found merit in these contentions. It held that an RTI reply cannot form the basis for an original application, and that no parity can be drawn between the pension schemes of the regular army and the territorial army because the governing regulations are different. The Court observed that the Tribunal had granted relief without requiring the respondent to identify a specific comparator, rendering the claim impermissibly vague. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed and the Tribunal’s order was set aside. The decision underscores that distinct service rules preclude indiscriminate claims for pension parity and that a cause of action must be founded on a legal right, not merely on an RTI response.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pension - Stepping Up of Pension - Defence Services Regulations - RTI reply does not constitute a cause of action for filing an original application seeking stepping up of pension; rules for regular army and territorial army are distinct and not comparable; thus, a claim for parity without identifying a specific comparator is vague and not maintainable - Held that the Armed Forces Tribunal erred in entertaining such a claim (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a regular army pensioner can claim stepping up of pension on par with territorial army pensioner based on an RTI reply, and whether the Armed Forces Tribunal erred in granting such relief without a specific comparator.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal, holding that an RTI reply does not constitute a cause of action and that regular army and territorial army pension rules are distinct and not comparable.
Law Points
- RTI reply does not constitute a cause of action for filing original application
- Pension rules for regular army and territorial army are distinct and not comparable
- Stepping up of pension claim must identify a specific comparator
- Vague claim is not entertainable
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (03) 82
W.P.No.4876 of 2025 and WMP.No.5406 of 2025
S.M. Subramaniam, K. Rajasekar
V. Balasubramanian (Senior Panel Counsel for Petitioners), M.K. Sikdar (for Respondent)
Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Defence; The Chief of the Army Staff; The Officer-in-Charge, Madras Regiment Records; The Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions)
Ex-Sub (Hony Sub Maj), Nagarajan, JC-128500 'H', S/o. Govindan
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of the Armed Forces Tribunal directing stepping up of pension.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners (Union of India and others) sought a writ of certiorari to quash the Armed Forces Tribunal order dated 11.09.2023 in O.A.No.157 of 2022.
Filing Reason
The Tribunal had directed stepping up of pension for a regular army pensioner to match that of territorial army pensioners based on a vague claim and despite distinct service rules, which the petitioners contended was erroneous.
Previous Decisions
The Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chennai, by order dated 11.09.2023, allowed O.A.No.157 of 2022 filed by the respondent and directed stepping up of his pension.
Issues
Whether an RTI reply can furnish a cause of action for an original application seeking stepping up of pension.
Whether a regular army pensioner can claim stepping up of pension on par with territorial army pensioner despite distinct service rules.
Whether a claim for stepping up of pension without identifying a specific comparator is maintainable.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners: The RTI reply does not provide a cause of action; the rules for regular army and territorial army pensions are distinct and not comparable; the respondent’s claim is vague as no specific pensioner has been identified for comparison; the original application was filed after a delay of about seven years.
Respondent: Opposed the contentions of the petitioners (details of the respondent's arguments are not fully available in the provided text).
Ratio Decidendi
An RTI reply does not provide a cause of action for filing an original application; pension rules for regular army and territorial army are distinct and not comparable, thus no parity can be claimed; a claim for stepping up of pension is vague and not maintainable without identifying a specific comparator.
Judgment Excerpts
The reply to an RTI application would provide no cause for institution of Original Application seeking stepping up of pension on par with the territorial army pensioner.
Rules for regular and territorial army are distinct and different and not comparable.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the orders of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chennai in OA.No.157 of 2022 dated 11.09.2023, Union of India, preferred the present writ petition.
Procedural History
The respondent, a regular army pensioner, filed O.A.No.157 of 2022 before the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chennai, challenging an order dated 18.02.2017 which was a reply to an RTI application. He sought stepping up of his pension to match that of territorial army pensioners. The Tribunal allowed the application on 11.09.2023. Aggrieved by this, the Union of India and other authorities filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the Tribunal's order. A preliminary objection was raised that the original application was filed after a delay of about seven years.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India, 1950: Article 226
- Right to Information Act, 2005:
