1

REPORTABLE  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.  4474 OF 2005

Union of India & Anr. .... Appellants

Versus

C.S. Sidhu .... Respondent

O R D E R

Heard Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, learned Addl. Solicitor  

General appearing for the appellants.

2. There is no appearance on behalf of the respondent  

today.  

3. This appeal by special leave is directed against the  

impugned judgment and order dated 11.12.2003 of the Division  

Bench of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana whereby the writ  

petition  filed  by  the  respondent  herein  (writ  petitioner  

before the High Court) has been allowed and  the appellants  

herein  (respondents  before  the  High  Court)  have  been  

directed to count the entire period of full pay commissioned  

service of the respondent from 22.06.1968 to 23.06.1978 as  

qualifying service and calculate his disability pension in

2

accordance with pension scales as on 23.6.1978 and give him  

all other benefits inuring therefrom.   

4. The facts in detail have been given in the impugned  

judgment and order.  Hence, we are not repeating the same  

here.

5. The question involved in this appeal is whether the  

full  pay  commissioned  service  rendered  by  the  respondent  

herein from 22.06.1968 to 23.06.1978 is to be counted as  

qualifying service by the Union of India for the purpose of  

granting disability pension to the respondent.   

6. The respondent herein was an officer in the Indian  

Army who was given a short service commission on 22.06.1968.  

A short service commission is given for 5 years and can be  

extended by another 5 years only.  He was posted at a high  

altitude field area and while on duty on 21.11.1970, he met  

with an accident and suffered severe injuries. As a result  

of the accident, respondent's right arm had to be amputated.  

He also suffered a compound fracture of the femur (thigh  

bone)  and  fracture  of  the  mandible  (jaw  bone).   He  was  

released  from  service  of  Army  on  23.6.1978.    For  his

3

disability  pension,  the  period  taken  into  account  by  the  

Army  authorities  was  only  from  22.6.1968  to  21.11.1970.  

Aggrieved by the said decision of the Army authorities, the  

respondent filed a writ petition before the High Court which  

has been allowed by the impugned judgment and order.  Hence,  

the appellants are in appeal before us.

7. We have gone through the impugned judgment and order  

and we are in full agreement with the Division Bench of the  

High Court that for the purposes of qualifying service for  

disability pension the entire period of commissioned service  

rendered by the respondent from 22.6.1968 to 23.6.1978 has  

to be taken into account.  Accordingly, we see no reason to  

interfere with the impugned judgment and order of the High  

Court.  The appeal is accordingly dismissed.  No order as to  

the costs.  Arrears with 8% interest per annum will be paid  

to the respondent within three months.   

8. Before parting with this case, we regret to say that  

the army officers and army men in our country are being  

treated in a shabby manner by the government.  In this case,  

the respondent, who was posted at a high altitude field area  

and met with an accident during discharge of his duties, was

4

granted a meager pension as stated in Annexure-P3 to this  

appeal.  This is a pittance (about Rs. 1000/- per month plus  

D.A.).    If this is the manner in which the army personnel  

are  treated,  it  can  only  be  said  that  it  is  extremely  

unfortunate.  The army personnel are bravely defending the  

country even at the cost of their lives and we feel that  

they should be treated in a better and more humane manner by  

the  governmental  authorities,  particularly,  in  respect  of  

their emoluments, pension and other benefits.

.....................J.       (MARKANDEY KATJU)

.....................J.                (A.K. PATNAIK)

NEW DELHI; MARCH 31, 2010