Santosh Devi vs Union Of India & Ors

The Supreme Court upheld the Armed Forces Tribunal's decision dismissing the appellant's claim for family pension under the Pension Regulation for Army (Part-I) 1961, stating that Ex. Sepoy Raj Singh did not meet the minimum qualifying service of fifteen years required for entitlement. The Court found that personnel in the Territorial Army, while in a disembodied state, do not have the same rights as regular army personnel, thus the denial of family pension was not discriminatory and did not violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's ruling.