Widow of soldier who died due to cardiac failure not eligible for Liberalised Family Pension

The Supreme Court has held that widows of soldiers who died due to cardiac failure from stress will not be eligible for “liberalised family pension” even if the death happened during active operation..The judgment was delivered by a Bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and Hemant Gupta..Facts.The husband of the Appellant was commissioned in the Army in October, 1968. In 1990, he was promoted as a Colonel. When he was posted as the Commandant of 890 Animal Transport Battalion in Nowshera, Jammu and Kashmir, he was moved to Rajouri for Operational requirement in Operation Ran Vijay at the location of HQ 25 Infantry Division. In the morning of January 25, 1992, he was found dead in his room..The cause of death was found to be sudden cardiac failure due to high stress and strain. The Appellant was initially granted ordinary family pension and, later special family pension. She made a representation for grant of Liberalised Family Pension..The Appellant complained that the entry in the service record of her husband was wrongfully altered from “Physical casualty under Operation Rakshak” to “Physical casualty”. As there was no response, she filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh seeking alteration of the entry in the service record of her husband from “Physical casualty” to “Physical casualty under Operation Rakshak”. The High Court allowed the Writ Petition and directed the alteration of the service record of the Appellant’s husband to “Physical Casualty under Operation Rakshak”..The High Court further directed the Respondents to consider grant of Liberalised Family Pension to the Appellant..After altering the entry in the service record of the Appellant’s husband from “Physical Casualty” to “Physical Casualty under Operation Rakshak”, the Respondents found that the Appellant was not entitled to Liberalised Family Pension..Aggrieved by the rejection of the request for payment of Liberalised Family Pension, the Appellant approached the High Court of Punjab and Haryana by filing a Writ Petition. The Writ Petition was transferred to the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh..Opining that cardiac failure does not fall under Category ‘E’ of Part II of the Instructions issued by the Government of India on January 31, 2001, the Tribunal dismissed the appellant’s plea. The legality of the judgment of the Tribunal was assailed before the Supreme Court..Legal framework.Liberalised Family Pension was announced in favour of the families of the Armed Forces personnel killed in action or to those who have been disabled on account of injuries sustained in the operations against Pakistan, commencing from December 3, 1971. The awards sanctioned therein were also made applicable to personnel who were killed in action or were disabled on account of injuries sustained in the international wars of 1965 (including Kutch and Kargil Operations), 1962 and 1947-1948 (Kashmir Operations), as well as the Goa and Hyderabad Operations..The Liberalised Family Pension was further extended to personnel who died or were disabled as a result of fighting in war-like Operations or border skirmishes either with Pakistan on the ceasefire line or any other country and those who fought against armed hostiles like Nagas and Mizos and during fighting in service with peace keeping missions abroad on or after 15th August, 1947..A decision was taken pursuant to the recommendations of the 4th Central Pay Commission regarding pensionary benefits to the Armed Forces personnel on October 30, 1987. Part IV of the letter dated 30th October, 1987 deals with Liberalized Pensionary Awards..The Government of India issued Instructions on January 31, 2001 for implementation of the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission regarding Liberalised Family Pension for the Armed Forces personnel retiring, invaliding or dying in harness on or after January 1, 1996..There was a broad division of cases arising out of attributable/aggravated causes into five categories. Operations specially notified by the Government from time to time were included in Category ‘E’. The eligible member of the family of the Armed Forces personnel falling in Category ‘E’ was entitled to Liberalised Family Pension in case of his death or disability..Certain concessions were made to the Armed Forces personnel who were deployed in Operation Rakshak by a notification dated May 7, 1990. Apart from others, Liberalized Pensionary Awards, subject to the conditions laid down in para I of the letter dated February 24, 1972 were made applicable to personnel in Operation Rakshak. Troops who were engaged in active operations against militants were held to be entitled to the field service concessions which were applicable to the location. In addition, those troops which were engaged in active operation against militants were held to be entitled to Liberalized Pensionary Awards, subject to the conditions laid down in the letter of 1972..Arguments.Senior Counsel V Mohana appearing for the Appellant submitted that all the Army personnel working in the State of Jammu and Kashmir were declared to be on active service as per the notification dated September 5, 1977. She relied upon Sections 3 and 9 of the Army Act, 1950 to submit that the Appellant’s husband was in active service at the time of his death..Though the Appellant’s husband was working as Commandant of the Animal Transport Battalion, his death due to sudden cardiac failure took place when he was in active service. She emphasized that the Appellant’s husband died during his service in Operation Rakshak which was a notified Operation mentioned in Category ‘E’ of para 4.1 of the Instructions of January, 2001. She submitted that according to the Instructions, the Appellant is entitled to Liberalised Family Pension as per para 6..Additional Solicitor General Madhavi Divan contended that Liberalised Family Pension is associated exclusively with pension granted in respect of death or injury caused in live-action. Placing reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Brij Mohan Lal v. Union of India, she submitted that grant of Liberalised Family Pension for death by natural causes would diminish the sheen of the sacrifice of the servicemen who were killed in live-action..The death of the Appellant’s husband due to sudden cardiac failure would fall under Category ‘B’ of the Instructions issued in January 2001 and the applicable Special Family Pension was rightly granted to the Appellant, she argued. The very genesis of the Liberalised Family Pension highlighted by the Additional Solicitor General was through a communication dated February 24, 1972 which was issued for the purpose of acknowledging the sacrifice of persons who were killed in live-action..Judgment.The basis of the claim of the Appellant for Liberalised Family Pension flowed from the Instructions of January 2001..The Court conceded that Operation Rakshak is a notified Operation falling under Clause 9 of Category ‘E’. It also agreed that those covered in Category ‘E’ are entitled for Liberalised Family Pension. However, the notification issued by the Government extending concessions to the Armed Forces personnel deployed in Operation Rakshak provides that Liberalized Pensionary Awards are extended only to those troops in active Operations against militants in terms of para I of the letter dated February 24, 1972..As per para I of letter of 1972, only personnel killed or disabled on account of injuries in action are eligible for Liberalized Pensionary Awards, the Court ruled..Thus, the Court concluded that the Appellant is not entitled to the Liberalised Family Pension since he was not killed during live-action. The appeals were, therefore, dismissed..[Read Judgment]