The Supreme Court has held that arrears of disability pension cannot be restricted to 3 years prior to filing applications before the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT).
The bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe ruled that eligible ex-servicemen are entitled to receive disability pension with the benefit of broad banding from the applicable cut-off dates — 01.01.1996 or 01.01.2006 — along with interest at 6% per annum.
The ruling came in a batch of civil appeals led by Union of India v. SGT Girish Kumar & Ors., where conflicting decisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal on the issue of arrears had prompted judicial scrutiny.
Background of the Dispute
The controversy stemmed from differing orders of the AFT regarding the period for which arrears of disability pension were payable. In some cases, the Tribunal granted arrears from specified cut-off dates such as 01.01.1996 or 01.01.2006, while in others, it limited arrears to three years preceding the filing of the original application, invoking principles of limitation and delay.
The lead case concerned an Air Force Sergeant enrolled in 1988 and discharged in 2008 with 20% disability attributable to military service. Following the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Union of India v. Ram Avtar, which extended the benefit of “broad banding” of disability pension even to those who retired on completion of tenure, the respondent approached the AFT seeking recalculation of pension at 50% with arrears from the date of discharge.
The Tribunal granted broad banding from the date of superannuation, but disputes arose regarding the extent of arrears payable.
The Core Legal Issue
The central question before the Supreme Court was whether arrears of disability pension can be restricted to three years prior to filing of the original application before the Tribunal?
The Union of India argued that claims for arrears were subject to the Limitation Act, 1963 and Section 22 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007. It contended that even in cases of continuing wrong, arrears could not extend indefinitely.
Ex-servicemen, on the other hand, argued that their right to broad banding crystallised only after the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Ram Avtar, which was a judgment in rem, and that denial of arrears amounted to deprivation of property.
Supreme Court’s Analysis
A Bench comprising Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe rejected the Union’s arguments and delivered a strongly worded ruling in favour of ex-servicemen.
1. Ram Avtar Judgment Was in Rem
The Court emphasized that the 2014 Ram Avtar decision settled the law for all similarly placed personnel. Therefore, the benefit should have been extended suo motu by the Union of India instead of compelling ex-servicemen to approach the Tribunal individually.
2. Pension Is a Vested Property Right
Reiterating settled constitutional principles, the Court held that pension is not a bounty but a vested right and constitutes “property” under Article 300A of the Constitution.
Any denial of arrears already accrued through judicial determination and government policy would amount to unconstitutional deprivation of property.
3. Government’s Own Policy Supported Full Arrears
The Court noted that the Government had itself issued communications acknowledging entitlement to arrears from 01.01.1996 or 01.01.2006. Having taken a conscious policy decision, it could not subsequently restrict arrears to three years.
4. Limitation and Delay Arguments Rejected
The Court held that the right to seek broad banding effectively accrued only after the 2014 judgment. Therefore:
- The bar under Section 22 of the AFT Act did not apply.
- The principle laid down in Tarsem Singh was distinguishable.
- The claims did not suffer from delay or laches.
Final Directions
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Union of India and set aside AFT orders that restricted arrears to three years.
The court directed payment of disability pension with broad banding from 01.01.1996 or 01.01.2006, as applicable along with interest at 6% per annum.
Case Details
Case Title: Union Of India Versus SGT Girish Kumar
Case No.: Civil Appeal Nos.6820-6824 Of 2018
Date: 12/02/2026
