Today, the Supreme Court imposed a fine of ₹50,000 on the Central government for contesting the grant of Liberalized Family Pension to the widow of an Army soldier who passed away in 2013 from a cardiac arrest while engaged in operational activity near the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir.
A division bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih criticized the government for its lack of compassion towards the widow and for escalating the case to the Supreme Court instead of resolving it earlier.
"In a case like this, the respondent ought not to have been dragged to this Court, and the decision-making authority of the appellants ought to have been sympathetic to the widow of a deceased soldier who died in harness. Therefore, we propose to impose costs quantified as ₹50,000," the Court said.
The case stemmed back to January 2013, when the soldier complained of breathlessness while on duty under extreme climatic conditions near the Line of Control (LoC). The regimental medical officer assessed his condition as critical.
Due to adverse weather, air evacuation was not possible, and the soldier had to be moved on foot. Tragically, he was declared dead upon reaching the nearest medical inspection room, with cardiac arrest identified as the cause of death.
Initially, the soldier’s death was categorized as a 'battle casualty.' However, it was later reclassified as a ‘physical casualty’ attributable to military service.
While the widow was granted all terminal benefits, including a special family pension, she was denied the Liberalized Family Pension (LFP).
Dissatisfied, the widow approached the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), which ruled in her favor. The Union government, however, challenged this decision in the Supreme Court.
The main issue before the Supreme Court was whether the soldier's death qualified as a 'battle casualty' or a 'physical casualty.' The Court concluded that his death fell under the category of 'battle casualty,' as it occurred due to extreme weather conditions while on duty.
It further held that the case was covered under Army Order 1 of 2003, upholding the widow’s entitlement to the Liberalized Family Pension.
"The death can be attributed to illness caused by extreme climatic conditions. Hence, as per clause 1 (g) of Appendix ‘A’ of the Army Order 1 of 2003, the case will fall in ‘Battle Casualties’. The reason is that the deceased was operating near LC in extreme climatic conditions. He was part of Operation Rakshak and was on duty near LC. The casualty caused by illness due to climatic conditions is covered by clause 1 (g). In this case, the respondent’s husband was a victim of illness caused by extreme climatic conditions. Therefore, the case of the deceased will fall in the category of ‘Battle Casualties’," the Court observed while dismissing the appeal of the Union.
Additional Solicitor General Vikramjit Banerjee appeared for the Union government.
Senior Advocate K Parameshwar appeared for the widow of the deceased-soldier.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy