AFT Directs Government to Increase Pension for Pilot’s Widow

AFT Directs Government to Increase Pension for Pilot’s Widow

AFT Directs Government to Increase Pension for Pilot’s Widow

Twenty-four years after the death of Indian Air Force pilot and Squadron Leader FS Siddiqui during a rescue operation, the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has directed the Union government to grant his wife the Liberalised Family Pension rather than the earlier Special Family Pension. This decision comes as a result of the case that was brought before the AFT. [Smt Madhulika Siddiqui versus the Union of India and others]

In August of 1999, Siddiqui was killed when his helicopter crashed while on a mission to rescue some German trekkers who had become stuck in the Lahaul-Spiti region of Himachal Pradesh as a result of a cloudburst.

Due to the fact that his death was ruled to be the result of his time spent in the military, his widow, Madhulika Siddiqui, was awarded a Special Family Pension.

However, in 2001, two years after he passed away, the Central government adopted the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission. These recommendations stated that widows whose husbands had died in such missions were made eligible for the Liberalised Family Pension, which is a better kind of pension. This occurred in accordance with the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission.

The decision was taken to take effect backwards, starting with 1996, when it was first implemented. On the other hand, Siddiqui’s wife was not eligible for the Liberalised Pension because the Air Force did not issue her with a “battle casualty” certificate. In the year 2020, she was awarded the certificate.

The certification that was submitted by the Air Force, however, was not accepted by the Joint Controller of Defence Accounts. The Joint Controller of Defence Accounts stated that her situation did not fit within the guidelines for the grant of a Liberalised Family Pension.

When there is a positive declaration in favour of a claimant, it cannot be overturned by the Accounts Branch, according to the Chandigarh Bench of the AFT, which is comprised of Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary and Lieutenant General (retired) Ranbir Singh. This is a well-established principle of the law, according to the Chandigarh Bench.

In addition, it was stated that the Accounts Branch’s sole responsibility is to compute the amount of pension and that it is not authorised to review or approve the decisions made by the responsible authorities.

According to the conclusion reached by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AFT), “We are therefore not in agreement with the stand taken by the respondents (Union of India and others) as there is no denial to that part of application’s case in which she has claimed that the points in issue in this application are squarely covered in her favour by the policy dated 31.01.2001.”

A pension under the Liberalised Family Pension was to be awarded to Siddiqui’s wife beginning on August 5, 1999, as directed by the Tribunal to the relevant authorities.

In addition, it directed that the benefits be distributed to her within a period of three months beginning on the date that a copy of the order was received by the court. Thursday was the day when the order dated July 28 was made available.

Advocates Navdeep Singh and Akanksha Duvedi spoke on Madhulika Siddiqui’s behalf throughout the proceeding.

Satyawan Ahawat, a Senior Panel Counsel, acted as a representative for the Union of India and the other respondents.