New Delhi, Feb 27.
The Supreme Court on Monday warned the Ministry of Defence of contempt over its recent decision to unilaterally extend the court deadline for payment of OROP dues to ex-servicemen.
A top court bench led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud has earlier extended the deadline for payments to all eligible pensioners twice. The last order had extended the time to pay till March 15, 2023.
The top court had upheld the OROP scheme of the government in March 2022 and asked the central government to pay up the dues. Two extensions later, the MOD, seems to have extended the time period further in a communication not shared with the court.
Today when the court’s attention was drawn to this, CJI Chandrachud said, that no unilateral extension can be made to a court mandated deadline.
He said this was tantamount to contempt and demanded an explanation from the secretary dealing with pensions personally. Contempt of court carries a maximum jail term of six months. The court can also invoke its extraordinary powers to further extend this.
The bench also warned the government that it may have to pay nine per cent interest on the delay in paying the dues beyond the court-mandated deadline.
CJI Chandrachud was sitting alongside Justices P.S. Narasimha and J.B. Pardiwala today when senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi drew the court’s attention to a communication which had altered the deadline by promising the payments in four quarterly instalments which would take it beyond.
“How can the department modify a court order?” he said. He claimed that some 4 lakh pensioners have passed away while waiting for their pension. The CJI then expressed his unhappiness with the development.
“Set your house in order. If not, we will issue a contempt notice to the Ministry of Defence,” the CJI warned. Eventually, he ordered the concerned secretary to file a personal affidavit explaining this.
Normally court orders are expected to be adhered to and any change is only made with consent of the bench which has passed the order. That is a basic tenet of rule of law. CJI Chandrachud’s reaction was consistent with the legal position on such issues.
“This is not about war, it is about rule of law,” the CJI remarked.
