Union Of India And Others v. Gurcharan Singh And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CM-14310-2025 in/and Decided on : 22.09.2025 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

...Petitioners

Versus

GURCHARAN SINGH AND ANOTHER . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI PRESENT: Ms. Krishna Dayama, Advocate Senior Panel Counsel, for the petitioners.

(appears through virtual mode).

**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral) CM-14310-CWP-2025 The prayer in the present application filed is for placing on record the order dated 27.10.2023 passed in OA-4330 of 2018 titled as 'Ex. Corporal Devinder Singh versus Union of India and others'. Keeping in view the averments mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Copy of order dated 27.10.2023 passed in OA-4330 of 2018 titled as 'Ex. Corporal Devinder Singh versus Union of India and others' is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. CWP-26653-2025 1.

In the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned order dated 06.12.2024 (Annexure P-1), passed by respondent No. 2-Armed Forces

Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (herein after referred to the Tribunal), by which, the original application bearing No. 1855 of 2023 filed by the respondent No. 1 for grant of reservist pension, has been allowed. 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the claim of respondent No. 1 has been allowed by the Tribunal in terms of the order dated 27.10.2023 passed in OA-4330 of 2018 titled as 'Ex. Corporal Devinder Singh versus Union of India and others', which is incorrect, hence, the same may kindly be set-aside.

2.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the case file with her able assistance. 3.

On being asked to point out any differentiating factor between the case of respondent No. 1 herein and the claimant in judgment passed in OA-4330 of 2018 titled as 'Ex. Corporal Devinder Singh versus Union of India and others', learned counsel for the petitioners very fairly concedes the fact that the claim raised in the both cases is identical and that there is no differentiating factor between both the cases of both the claimants, which could be brought to the notice of this Court. 4.

Further, learned counsel for the petitioners was asked as to whether the judgment passed in Ex-Corporal Devinder Singh's case (supra) has been challenged or not. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a writ petition was filed challenging the said judgment passed in Ex-Corporal Devinder Singh's case (supra), but the same has already been dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 5.

Keeping in view the fact that the judgment passed in ExCorporal Devinder Singh's case (supra) has already been upheld by the Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court and the benefit has already been extended to Ex-Corporal Devinder Singh alongwith the fact that there is no differentiating factor between the claim of the respondent No. 1 herein and the claim of the claimant in Ex-Corporal Devinder Singh's case (supra) is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners, no
 



  

           

  



 

 6.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

7.

Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of.

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE ( VIKAS SURI ) JUDGE 22.09.2025 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No