9+6 and 10+10 Active+Reservist category denied Pension
Ministry of Defence Report of Raksha Mantri’s Committee of Experts to review of service and pension matters including potential disputes, minimizing litigation and strengthing institutional mechanism related to redressal of grievances, 2015 at its page 188.8.131.52 about the plight of those who joined the Air Force and Naval service, but were discharged after completion of active service en mass resulting in denial of Reservist Pension to them. Click here to see complete report Reportcc. Copy of extracts of report is reproduced as below
PENSIONARY AND RETIRAL MATTERS 58 2.2.13
RESERVIST PENSION TO RESERVISTS RELEASED FROM SERVICE COMPULSORILY PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF PENSIONABLE COLOUR + RESERVE SERVICE:
Prior to coming into force of the current system of recruitment of full physical terms of engagement, personnel of the defence services were recruited as per the Colour + Reserve scheme. After completion of combined Colour and Reserve Service of 15 years, such individuals were entitled to “Reservist Pension”. For example, in the Air Force, individuals were recruited under the 9 + 6 system wherein they were meant to serve for 9 years in colours (physical service) and then 6 years in reserve wherein they could indulge in any vocation of their choice but were liable for a call-out on mobilization in an emergency.
Due to service constraints of those times, many of such individuals were released in large numbers with gratuity after completion of their colour service but prior to completion of the terms of their reserve service thereby resulting in denial of “Reservist Pension” to them.
This led to a spate of litigation wherein it was held by Courts and Tribunals that based on the principles of promissory estoppel, such individuals could not be denied the benefit of ‘Reservist Pension’ since they were unilaterally released without letting them complete their service as was promised at the time of recruitment. Many of such cases have attained finality including an appeal filed by an affected reservist whose case was initially dismissed by the AFT, that is, Civil Appeal 4787/2012 Cpl Baldev Singh Vs Union of India decided on 06-01-2015 wherein the Supreme Court had held the affected reservist entitled to reservist pension with a restriction of financial benefits for three years prior to filing of the petition.
No policy decision has been taken by the Ministry till date on the subject despite a positive proposal to the effect by the Air HQ. PENSIONARY AND RETIRAL MATTERS
The Committee hence recommends that the decision as rendered by the Supreme Court in Baldev Singh’s case (supra) be implemented in the same terms and all such similarly placed affected personnel be released “Reservist Pension”. All pending and future cases in Courts and Tribunals be conceded and all appeals be withdrawn.
IN CASE OF ANY QUERY OR ASSISTANCE, LEAVE A REPLY BELOW