Javed Ali v. Union Of India

CWP-37729-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-37729-2025 DATE OF DECISION: 08.04.2026 MAJOR JAVED ALI ... Petitioner

Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Present:

Mr. Navdeep Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Advocate and Ms. Japuji Kaur Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Bharat Bhushan Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel, for the respondents.

**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) The grievance of the petitioner was noted while issuing notice of motion on 24.12.2025. The said order is as under:- "Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that once in the earlier round of litigation before the Tribunal, a finding was recorded by the Tribunal vide order dated 08.04.2024 passed in OA No.1542 of 2022 that the claim of the petitioner for the grant of war injury pension is made out and even the benefit of interest @ 8% per annum was granted in case the same is not granted to petitioner merely because the language in a particular sentence used was that the respondents were directed to decide the said issue, it does not mean that they will go contrary to the findings already recorded by the Tribunal so as to decline the claim of petitioner and even the Tribunal, in the contempt petition filed against such action of respondents, has not appreciated the same.

Notice of motion.

KUMARI SAPNA 2026.04.10 16.35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-37729-2025 Mr. Bharat Bhushan Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and seeks short adjournment. Priam facie, keeping in view the order passed by the Tribunal, which has gone un-assailed at the hands of the respondents, where findings have been recorded qua the entitlement of the petitioner for grant of war injury pension, decision so taken by respondents is perverse.

Let the respondents come out as to on what ground, the benefit of war injury pension has been denied to the petitioner. In case, such kind of orders are allowed to be passed, it will increase the amount of litigation rather than decreasing the same so as to grant the benefit to a soldier, who has fought for the country.

Adjourned to 13.01.2026."

2.

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Advocate has brought to our notice a communication dated 08.04.2026 that the file has been processed for implementation and has been forwarded for financial concurrence on 18.03.2026. 3.

Keeping in view the above, the direction is given to the respondents to release all the benefits admissible to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It may be noticed that in case the order is not complied with, harsh view will be taken including initiation of the contempt proceeding for violating not only the order passed by the competent Court of law but even for not adhering to the undertaking given to this Court. 4.

Let the respondents file an affidavit of the compliance to this Court. 5.

The petition is disposed of accordingly.

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) 08.04.2026 JUDGE sapna adhikari Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No KUMARI SAPNA 2026.04.10 16.35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document