B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Heard learned Additional Solicitor General for the appellant-Union of India and the learned counsel for the respondent. The appeal is preferred against the judgment of the Delhi High Court allowing the Writ Petition filed by the respondent and directing the Union of India to disburse the retiral benefits such as pension, gratuity etc. as permissible under the Rules to him within one month from the date of the judgment. It was further directed that the respondents claim for payment in respect of encashment of 202 days annual leave shall be dealt with and decided in accordance with the Rules and the amount found payable shall be paid to him within the same period. Claim for interest on the said amounts was however rejected.
(3.) The respondent joined the Army as a Commissioned Officer on June 12, 1960. He earned promotions in due course and retired in the rank of Brigadier on December 31, 1991 on attaining the age of superannuation. Since the retiral benefits due to him were not paid, he laid a claim therefor. While so, in January 1992, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him. He was tried by a General Court-Martial and awarded three years rigorous imprisonment and was also cashiered. The findings of the Court-Martial were confirmed by the Chief of Army Staff and have become final. Since the retiral benefits were not paid to him, he approached the Delhi High Court by way of Writ Petition No. 5414 of 1993. The High Court held, following the decision of this Court in Major G. S. Sodhi vs. Union of India (1991) 2 SCC 371, that cashiering does not by itself result in forfeiture of the retiral benefits and accordingly allowed the writ petition and gave the directions aforementioned.;