For the third time in less than two months, the Supreme Court has strongly criticized the Narendra Modi government for repeatedly dragging retired armed forces personnel to court. The latest admonishment came on Thursday during a hearing of an appeal filed by the Union of India against an Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) order that granted disability pension to a radio fitter.
A division bench comprising Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan expressed dismay at the government’s approach. “The Government of India should not drag retired members of the armed forces to court like this. We are being magnanimous by not imposing costs on such appeals,” the bench observed.
The Supreme Court directed the Centre to develop a policy regarding appeals against AFT orders before the next hearing. “There should be some discretion and a clear policy about which cases warrant being brought to the Supreme Court. Perhaps only cases involving substantial monetary implications should be considered,” the bench noted.
Justice Oka emphasized the need for pragmatism in the government’s decisions. “Someone works for 15-20 years, develops a disability, and is granted a disability pension by the Tribunal. Why should such individuals be dragged to the Supreme Court?” he questioned.
The bench also warned the Centre that if no policy is formulated, the court would begin imposing heavy costs for frivolous appeals.
The court highlighted a growing trend of the government filing appeals against AFT decisions that favor armed forces personnel or their families. Justice Oka reminded the Centre that the AFT includes highly qualified members, including senior retired armed forces officers and retired high court judges.
“Filing frivolous appeals undermines the morale of the armed forces. These are people who have served the nation. What message does it send when they are repeatedly forced to fight for their rights in court?” Justice Oka asked.
In December 2024, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih reprimanded the government for dragging the widow of a deceased soldier to court. The soldier had died in 2013 during an operational activity near the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir. Initially classified as a “battle casualty,” his death was later reclassified as a “physical casualty.”
The AFT had ruled in favor of granting the widow a Liberalised Family Pension, but the government challenged the decision. The Supreme Court ordered the Centre to pay Rs 50,000 to the widow, expressing dissatisfaction with the lack of sympathy shown to her. “In a case like this, the respondent ought not to have been dragged to this Court,” the bench had stated.
Similarly, three weeks ago, the same bench criticized the government for appealing an AFT order that granted disability pension to a retired Indian Air Force officer diagnosed with hypertension and diabetes. The bench questioned the necessity of filing such appeals.
“As it is, few people are willing to serve in the armed forces. Why should those who serve the nation be dragged to court like this? The purpose of setting up the AFT is defeated if every decision is challenged in the Supreme Court,” the bench remarked.
The court underscored the importance of respecting the contributions of armed forces personnel. Justice Oka noted, “When members of the armed forces see their peers being forced to fight legal battles even after their service, it can severely impact morale. The government must consider this when making decisions.”
The court has given the Centre until the next hearing to decide whether it will adopt a policy to limit such appeals. Failure to do so could result in significant costs being imposed on the government for filing frivolous cases.
The Supreme Court’s firm stance is a reminder of the need to protect the dignity and rights of those who have dedicated their lives to the nation’s service.
