IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGA 132 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS TARSEM LAL AND ANR CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPA Present: Mr. Harmanjot Singh Gill Advocate for the petitioners. ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) The petitioners have challenged the order dated (Annexure P-1) whereby the Application (O.A.) pension by condoning the shortfall of completing 15 years of service. 2. Heard. 3. After hearing considered view that this petition is been issued by the Armed Forces Tribunal to decide the case of in terms of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Original Application 1238 of 2016, titled Shama Kaur Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 01.10.2019. judgment had been implemented and was not challenged by the petitioners. The IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGA CWP-13786-2025 DATE OF DECISION: 18.07.2025 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Versus TARSEM LAL AND ANR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPA Mr. Harmanjot Singh Gill Advocate for the petitioners. ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) The petitioners have challenged the order dated 1) whereby the Armed Forces Tribunal ha (O.A.) preferred by respondent No.1 for release of second service pension by condoning the shortfall of 01 month and 04 days completing 15 years of service. Heard. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, we are of the considered view that this petition is devoid of been issued by the Armed Forces Tribunal to decide the case of in terms of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Original Application 1238 of 2016, titled Shama Kaur Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 01.10.2019. judgment had been implemented and was not challenged by the petitioners. The IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2025 DATE OF DECISION: 18.07.2025 … Petitioner (s) ... Respondent(s) HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Mr. Harmanjot Singh Gill Advocate for the petitioners. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 16.05.2023 Tribunal had allowed the Original No.1 for release of second service 01 month and 04 days service in counsel for the petitioners, we are of the void of any merit. The directions have been issued by the Armed Forces Tribunal to decide the case of respondent No.1 in terms of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Original Application 1238 of 2016, titled Smt. Shama Kaur Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 01.10.2019. This judgment had been implemented and was not challenged by the petitioners. The 3 allowed the Original No.1 for release of second service service in counsel for the petitioners, we are of the any merit. The directions have respondent No.1 in terms of the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Smt. This SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.07.18 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-13786-2025 -2- petitioners had also preferred a similar writ petition bearing CWP No.8886 of 2025 titled, Union of India and others Vs. Ex. Naik Kuldip Singh, which has been dismissed by the coordinate Bench of this Court on 24.04.2025. It is trite that the condonation of shortfall of service upto one year by judicial intervention has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Surender Singh Parmar, (2015) 3 SCC 404. It is also apt to notice that this petition has been preferred after a period of over 2 years of passing the impugned order. 4. In view of the above, this petition being devoid of any merits, stands dismissed. (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 18.07.2025 SwarnjitS Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.07.18 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document