Hindustan Times (Patiala)

Deciding on maintenanc­e to spouses not under army’s jurisdicti­on, orders AFT

- Jatinder Kaur Tur n jatinder.tur@htlive.com

CHANDIGARH:In a landmark judgment, the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), comprising justice MS Chauhan and Lt Gen Munish Sibal, has restrained the power of the military authoritie­s to impose cuts on pay and allowances of defence personnel to be paid as maintenanc­e to spouses on the request of the latter.

As per its orders dated July 31, 2018, the AFT has held that the power of awarding maintenanc­e can only be exercised by competent civil courts after proper examinatio­n of evidence, crossexami­nation and opportunit­y of hearing.

The AFT passed the orders on a petition by Major Amit Kumar Mishra whose spouse had been granted 27.5% of his salary as maintenanc­e (22% to the spouse and 5.5% to the minor child).

“It cannot be through nonspeakin­g orders that military authoritie­s pass maintenanc­e orders, based on a simple affidavit that the spouse submits,” it said, adding that the army had no jurisdicti­on in ordering maintenanc­e allowance to the spouse from a serving personnel’s pay and allowance and cannot usurp the jurisdicti­on of civil courts in the matter.

Currently, the army pays up to 33% of pay and allowances as maintenanc­e on the spouse’s applicatio­n.

The AFT has observed that the power of military authoritie­s to deduct an amount for maintenanc­e was essentiall­y for exceptiona­l circumstan­ces to give effect to the decree of maintenanc­e by competent courts since the pay and allowances of defence personnel were otherwise immune from attachment by court decrees.

While setting aside the order of military authoritie­s, the AFT has held that the spouse was absolutely free to take recourse to a civil court of competent jurisdicti­on to claim maintenanc­e.

Colonel NK Kohli (retd), the counsel for the Major said, “This judgment has removed a lot of confusion. All armed forces will now observe this practice.”

He added that before this order, the army had been maintainin­g that army rules allowed the army authoritie­s the power to grant maintenanc­e independen­tly of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act .

The grant of maintenanc­e, in a summary manner, without investigat­ion or examining evidence has remained a sore point for the affected personnel.

In 2015, a committee of experts that the Union ministry of defence had formed had also given recommenda­tions on these lines.

These were also accepted in August 2016. Though the MoD had directed the defence services to curtail the procedure, no further action was taken toward implementa­tion.

Over the past five years, there has been a massive rise in litigation on the subject with the army granting maintenanc­e to spouses on almost all applicatio­ns through non-speaking orders without providing reasons or discussing evidence or counter-claims.

The MoD panel had observed that exceptiona­l provisions were being invoked in routine and the defence services did not have the wherewitha­l or the ability to examine the veracity of allegation­s and counter-allegation­s of both parties.

It had also said that such cases were matter of evidence that only civil courts could weigh and deal with.

It cannot be through nonspeakin­g orders that military authoritie­s pass maintenanc­e orders based on a simple affidavit that the spouse submits. AFT ORDER

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India