Featured image for Supreme Court Judgment dated 23-09-2019 in case of petitioner name Kanchan Dua vs Union of India & Anr.
| |

Liberalised Family Pension Denied: Supreme Court Rules on Army Casualty Case

The case of Kanchan Dua vs. Union of India & Anr. deals with the legal question of whether the widow of an Army officer, who died due to a heart attack during an operational deployment, is entitled to Liberalised Family Pension. The Supreme Court, in its judgment on September 23, 2019, upheld the rejection of the Liberalised Family Pension claim while granting the standard Special Family Pension and an ex-gratia payment.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Kanchan Dua, is the widow of Colonel Dua, who was commissioned into the Indian Army in 1968 and was promoted to Colonel in 1990. While serving as the Commandant of 890 Animal Transport Battalion in Nowshera, Jammu and Kashmir, he was moved to Rajouri under Operation Ran Vijay. On January 25, 1992, he was found dead in his room due to sudden cardiac failure caused by high stress and strain.

Initially, the appellant was granted an ordinary family pension, which was later converted into a Special Family Pension. However, she sought the Liberalised Family Pension, which is granted to the families of Armed Forces personnel who die in combat or war-like situations.

Legal Framework

The appellant based her claim on the modifications made to the pensionary rules by the Government of India on January 31, 2001. Under these rules, deaths categorized under Category ‘E’ are eligible for Liberalised Family Pension. The relevant subcategories include:

  • Death due to enemy action in war.
  • Death during border skirmishes.
  • Death while engaged in counter-insurgency operations.
  • Death in an operation specially notified by the Government of India.

Since Colonel Dua was part of Operation Rakshak, a notified operation in Jammu and Kashmir, his widow argued that she was entitled to the Liberalised Family Pension.

Arguments of the Appellant

The appellant contended:

  • Her husband’s death occurred during Operation Rakshak, which is a government-notified operation.
  • The Army initially recorded his death as a “physical casualty under Operation Rakshak” but later removed the reference to the operation.
  • Since he was in active service in an operational area, his death should be considered for Liberalised Family Pension.
  • The Army Act defines active service broadly, covering deaths due to stress and strain in operational areas.

Arguments of the Respondents

The Government of India, represented by Additional Solicitor General Madhavi Divan, opposed the claim, arguing:

  • Liberalised Family Pension is granted only in cases of combat-related deaths.
  • Colonel Dua’s death was due to natural causes (cardiac failure), not due to enemy action or combat.
  • The notification extending Liberalised Pensionary Awards to Operation Rakshak personnel only applies to troops engaged in active combat.
  • Granting Liberalised Family Pension for natural deaths would diminish the distinction between combat deaths and other service-related fatalities.

Supreme Court’s Judgment

The Supreme Court upheld the rejection of the Liberalised Family Pension, stating:

“Only personnel killed or disabled on account of injuries in action are eligible for Liberalized Pensionary Awards.”

The Court referred to the Government’s notification dated May 7, 1990, which specified that only troops engaged in active operations against militants in Operation Rakshak were entitled to the Liberalised Family Pension. Since Colonel Dua’s death was due to cardiac failure and not combat injuries, the claim was not eligible.

Ex-Gratia Payment

The Court ruled that the appellant was entitled to an ex-gratia payment of Rs. 5 lakhs, rejecting her claim for Rs. 7.5 lakhs, which is awarded only in cases of death due to enemy action or militant attacks.

Conclusion

The judgment highlights the distinction between Liberalised Family Pension and Special Family Pension. The ruling reaffirmed that Liberalised Family Pension is restricted to combat-related deaths and cannot be extended to natural deaths, even if they occur in operational areas. The decision also clarified the scope of ex-gratia payments for military personnel who die while on duty.


Petitioner Name: Kanchan Dua.
Respondent Name: Union of India & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice L. Nageswara Rao, Justice Hemant Gupta.
Place Of Incident: Rajouri, Jammu and Kashmir.
Judgment Date: 23-09-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Kanchan Dua vs Union of India & Anr Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 23-09-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Pension and Gratuity
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Judgment by L. Nageswara Rao
See all petitions in Judgment by Hemant Gupta
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments September 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category

Similar Posts