Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 66733 (PNJ)

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS v. NAIK SURENDER SINGH AND ANR

CWP/16916/2025 · 2025-07-01

Meenakshi I Mehta, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

143 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.16916 of 2025 Date of Decision: 01.07.2025 Union of India and others …Petitioners Versus No.14476322X Ex. (TS) Naik Surender Singh and another …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Present:- Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate Senior Panel Counsel for the petitioners. * * * * SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA J.(Oral) The challenge in this writ-petition is to the order dated 12.07.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.2-Armed Forces Tribunal (for short ‘the AFT’) whereby the AFT has proceeded to grant the benefit of War Injury Pension to the applicant (respondent No.1 herein) in terms of the letter dated 31.01.2001 as he suffered Frost Bite Both Feet while being deployed in China Operation. 2. As noticed earlier by us in a separate judgment, the injury admittedly was caused during the China Operation and falls under Category E (i) the disability occurred on 28.08.1998 and thus, would be available for grant of coronary pension. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the same was claimed after a long delay would be wholly without basis as the SEEMA SHARMA 2025.07.03 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP No.16916 of 2025 -2- notification was issued in the year 2001 relating to persons who suffered war injuries during Kargil Operation from 01.01.1996 onwards. Respondent No.1 suffered frost bite (RT) hand resulting in amputation and he should be granted the said War Injury Pension instead of disability pension which was awarded to him and the same has rightly been rounded up to 75% by the AFT. 4. In view of above, we find that the order passed by respondent No.2-AFT does not warrant any interference. The writ-petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE 01.07.2025 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) seema JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No SEEMA SHARMA 2025.07.03 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment