121 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL AND ANOTHER CORAM: Present: HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) 1. 07.12.2022 (Annexure P Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’), by grant of service pension after condoning the deficiency of service equivalent to one year months and 25 days of service 2. the present petition with regard to the grant of benefit of condonation of deficiency of shortfall in qualifying service for grant of reservist pension the officer concerned to the minimum of 15 yea grant of disability pension including the family pension and thereafter, service pension as the case may be, has already been decided by the Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India while passing judgment in others Versus Balakrishnan Mullikote (Ex.HAV 256812 M) Civil Appeal arising out of Diary No.27446 of 2023, decided on 24.03.2026. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-20443 Date of Decision : UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS VERSUS ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL AND ANOTHER CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL Mr. Narender Kumar Vashist, Advocate for the petitioners-Union of India. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) In the present petition, challenge is to the impugned order dated 07.12.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent No.1 Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’), by which, the respondent No.2 has been held entitled for the grant of service pension after condoning the deficiency of service equivalent to one year, 05 months and 05 day as he has already rendered 13 years, 06 months and 25 days of service. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the issue raised in the present petition with regard to the grant of benefit of condonation of deficiency of shortfall in qualifying service for grant of reservist pension the officer concerned to the minimum of 15 yea grant of disability pension including the family pension and thereafter, service pension as the case may be, has already been decided by the Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India while passing judgment in rs Versus Balakrishnan Mullikote (Ex.HAV 256812 M) Civil Appeal arising out of Diary No.27446 of 2023, decided on 24.03.2026. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 20443-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 09.07.2026 ........Petitioners VERSUS ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL AND ANOTHER ........Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL Narender Kumar Vashist, Advocate Union of India. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) he present petition, challenge is to the impugned order dated 1) passed by the respondent No.1-Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as which, the respondent No.2 has been held entitled for the grant of service pension after condoning the deficiency of service equivalent , 05 months and 05 day as he has already rendered 13 years, 06 ounsel for the parties submit that the issue raised in the present petition with regard to the grant of benefit of condonation of deficiency of shortfall in qualifying service for grant of reservist pension the officer concerned to the minimum of 15 years, which is required for the grant of disability pension including the family pension and thereafter, service pension as the case may be, has already been decided by the Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India while passing judgment in Union of India and rs Versus Balakrishnan Mullikote (Ex.HAV 256812 M) Civil Appeal arising out of Diary No.27446 of 2023, decided on 24.03.2026. he present petition, challenge is to the impugned order dated Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as which, the respondent No.2 has been held entitled for the grant of service pension after condoning the deficiency of service equivalent , 05 months and 05 day as he has already rendered 13 years, 06 ounsel for the parties submit that the issue raised in the present petition with regard to the grant of benefit of condonation of deficiency of shortfall in qualifying service for grant of reservist pension of rs, which is required for the grant of disability pension including the family pension and thereafter, service pension as the case may be, has already been decided by the Hon’ble Union of India and rs Versus Balakrishnan Mullikote (Ex.HAV 256812 M) Civil Appeal SAPNA GOYAL 2026.07.10 13:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-20443-2026 (O&M) -2- 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file with their able assistance. 4. Keeping in view the facts mentioned hereinbefore, we consider that the issue raised in this petition is covered by the judgment in Balakrishnan Mullikote’s case (supra), the present petition is also disposed of in the same terms and conditions as held in Balakrishnan Mullikote’s case (supra) and the petitioners are directed to pass an appropriate order with regard to the claim of respondent No.2 for the grant of service pension as per the judgment passed by Balakrishnan Mullikote’s case (supra). 5. Let the present order be complied with by the petitioners within the period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 6. It is made clear that in case, any order passed by the petitioners is contrary to the observations given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Balakrishnan Mullikote’s case (supra), the same will not only be treated perverse to the settled principle of law but will also amount to the contempt of the Court. 7. Miscellaneous application pending, if any, is also disposed of. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE 09-07-2026 Sapna Goyal (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/ reasoned: YES Whether reportable: NO SAPNA GOYAL 2026.07.10 13:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document