2025:HHC:20039 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 10129 of 2025 Decided on: 25 th June , 2025 __________________________________________________ Union of India and Others ....Petitioners Versus No.15122100M Ex Naik Prem Singh ...Respondent ___________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioners: Mr. Balram Sharma, DSGI with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) The present petition has been filed against the order of Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh dated 20.04.2023 filed on 06.06.2025 and after the usual inordinate delay of 2 years and is squarely covered by the judgment passed by us in CWP No.2522 of 2025 titled Union of India and Ors. vs. Pawna Devi on 25th February 2025. 2. It is to be noticed with regret that the Tribunal has allowed the petition on account of the fact that the serviceman 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? as such had been invalidated out of service on medical grounds due to the fact that he had received injuries on his person during the Skydiving Championship at Hindon and had been diagnosed with “Fracture C4 C5 Vertebra with Traumatic Quadri Flegia (OPTD) G 95.2,s-12.2” and had become 100% handicapped. He had laid a claim for War Injury Pension which has been granted to him w.e.f. 28.10.2005 for life. 3. The Tribunal noticed that the Army Order No.16 of 2003 had been withdrawn in August 2005 and the injury had been sustained by him on 26.04.2003 and therefore had granted the benefit of the said order. Apparently, there was no effort as such to challenge the said order for the last over 2 years and in such circumstances, the principle laid down in Pawna Devi’s case (supra) would come into play, which read as under:- “25. It is not the case of Union of India that there is any fraud or misrepresentation in the present set of cases, whereby mainly the legal representatives of the Armed Forces are seeking redressal of their rights. The State or the public body can be given some acceptable latitude keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the principle of limitation and though no precise formula, as such, can be laid down, but we cannot brush aside the fact that the parties in view of the orders passed by the Tribunal could have also resorted to getting the orders executed by filing appropriate remedies and Tribunal has also granted the benefit of penal interest, if the payment is not made 2 within the prescribed period. Inspite of this fact the Union of India chose to sit tight and chose not to file the writ petitions within a reasonable period which can be classified as one year and beyond the same, no indulgence can be granted. 26. Therefore, the period prior to 18.10.2023 as such between the date of the decisions ranging from May/August/November, 2022 cannot be condoned in any manner and therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the present writ petitions are liable to be dismissed on the grounds of delay and laches as on account of Union of India not having resorted to its legal remedies expeditiously or even having made reasonable effort to challenge the said orders or even take a decision as such to challenge the said orders for a period of over one year. The latitude as such on account of laxity on the department, in such circumstances cannot be extended. 27. Without going into the merits of the cases, we are of the considered opinion that there is a delay of over a year from passing of the orders and no effort was made to challenge the order passed by the Tribunal within a reasonable time, therefore, on account of the opinion given on 18.09.2023, the Union of India cannot raise the issue on merits.” 4. The usual plea as such of the opinion of the Attorney General dated 18.09.2023 has been taken which is not genuine to the controversy in question and neither the case of the said ex serviceman as such was put up before the said Attorney General nor there is anything on record to show that the said case was ever put up before the Attorney General for grant of any opinion. 5. In such circumstances we dismiss the present writ petition on the ground of delay and laches. We add another paragraph as a Caveat to Union of India that since we have 3 already passed the order on 25.02.2025 regarding the petitions which have been filed in February after two years delay, further filing of belated petitions after 30.06.2025 will entail a cost of Rs.50,000/- since we have already laid down the principles as such. It has been settled by the Apex Court also that it is not for the Union of India to get certificates from the highest Courts to show finality to the litigation. 6. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice 25 th May , 2025 ( Ranjan Sharma ) (ankit) Judge 4