UNION OF INDIA TH ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT. MINISTRY OF DEFENCE AND OTHERS v. EX NK JAGDISH RAJ
WP(C)/299/2026 · 2026-02-16
Sanjay Parihar, Sanjeev Kumar
Writ Petition (Civil)body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 186 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 186 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 299/2026
Date of Pronouncement: 16.02.2026 Date of Uploading: 18.02.2026.
Union of India and others .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. Vikas Sharma, Sr. Panel Counsel
v/s Ex. Nik Jagdish Raj .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. B.S Sarmal, Advocate
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDER(ORAL) SANJEEV KUMAR J
1. Impugned in this petition, filed by the Union of India under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is an order and judgment dated 25.07.2025 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench Srinagar at Jammu [“the Tribunal”] in OA No. 107/2023 titled “Ex Nk Jagdish Raj Vs. Union of India and others”, whereby the Tribunal has allowed the OA of the respondent and held him entitled to the grant of disability element of pension @ 20%, rounded off to 50%, w.e.f 01.01.1996, along with interest @ 6% per annum.
2. The impugned judgment is assailed by the Union of India only on the ground, that, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the recent judgment titled “Union of India and others Vs. SGT Girish Kumar and others”, 2026 INSC 149, the respondent having retired on superannuation on 31.01.1991 and discharged on his own request shall be entitled to the benefit of rounding off w.e.f.
01.01.2006.
Sr. No. 02
2
WP(C) No. 299/2026
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent does not dispute the legal position.
4. In view of the aforesaid, the judgment passed by the Tribunal is modified only to the extent that the respondent would be entitled to the grant of disability element @ 20% rounded off to 50% w.e.f 01.01.2006 instead of 01.01.1996. Rest of the order shall, however, remain intact.
5. The petition is, allowed to the aforesaid extent and, is, accordingly
disposed of.
(Sanjay Parihar) (Sanjeev Kumar)
Judge Judge
JAMMU 16.02.2026 Rahul Sharma