GUL AHMED KHAN NANEET DUBEY vs UNION OF INDIA DEFENCE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE NEW DELHI AND OTHERS — WP(C)/2717/2024

Case under Article 226-Section103 Section 1A. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 01st April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 18-Nov-2024

CNR: JKHC020058532024

Filing Number

WP(C)/4496/2024

Filing Date

05-Nov-2024

Registration No

WP(C)/2717/2024

Registration Date

14-Nov-2024

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Parihar

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Parihar

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

DB SERVICE WRIT PETITION – SWP ( 217 )

Sub-Category

AGAINST THE DECISION OF ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL. ( 3 )

Judicial Branch

SERVICE WRIT PETITION (SWP)

Decision Date

01-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 30-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Article 226-Section103 Section 1A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GUL AHMED KHAN NANEET DUBEY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UNION OF INDIA DEFENCE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE NEW DELHI AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar,hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay PariharView PDF

    Summary The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir allowed the petitioner's service pension claim, setting aside the Armed Forces Tribunal's dismissal. The court held that the petitioner's qualifying service of 13 years and 361 days should be rounded off to 14 years under Pension Regulations 1961/2008, which treat fractions exceeding three months as half-yearly service. Following Supreme Court precedent in Balakrishnan Mullikote, the shortfall was made good to 15 years, entitling him to service and family pension. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Parihar

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar,hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay PariharView PDF

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Parihar

  6. 10-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar,hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay PariharView PDF

  7. 10-Feb-2026

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahzad Azeem

  8. 12-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma,hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahzad AzeemView PDF

  9. 12-Nov-2025

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Parihar

  10. 10-Sep-2025

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Parihar

  11. 22-Aug-2025

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahzad Azeem

  12. 04-Jun-2025

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma,hon'ble Mr. Justice Shahzad AzeemView PDF

  13. 04-Jun-2025

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Sekhri

  14. 28-Apr-2025

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma,hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh SekhriView PDF

  15. 28-Apr-2025

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Puneet Gupta

  16. 08-Apr-2025

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Sekhri , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Atul Sreedharan

  17. 18-Feb-2025

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Puneet Gupta

  18. 04-Dec-2024

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar,hon'ble Mr. Justice Puneet GuptaView PDF

  19. 04-Dec-2024

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ma Chowdhary

  20. 18-Nov-2024

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,hon'ble Mr. Justice Ma ChowdharyView PDF

  21. 18-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  22. 05-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/2717/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir allowed the petitioner's service pension claim, setting aside the Armed Forces Tribunal's dismissal. The court held that the petitioner's qualifying service of 13 years and 361 days should be rounded off to 14 years under Pension Regulations 1961/2008, which treat fractions exceeding three months as half-yearly service. Following Supreme Court precedent in Balakrishnan Mullikote, the shortfall was made good to 15 years, entitling him to service and family pension. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case