Observing that the Central Government is filing writ petitions against orders passed in favour of defence personnel by the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), even in cases where the law has been settled, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has warned that officers responsible for filing such appeals would be liable to pay costs from their own pockets.“Though we wanted the present petition to be dismissed with costs to be paid by the concerned officer who decided to file the said writ petition, we refrain from doing so on the repeated requests of the learned counsel for the petitioner. In case the same trend continues in future, costs will also be imposed in such cases,” the Bench of Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Deepak Manchanda said in its order dated April 22.“It may be noticed that the petitioner, Union of India, has started filing writ petitions on a question of law which has already attained finality and the relief has already been granted to similarly situated employees, which is not appreciated,” the Bench ruled.The said action is also contrary to the Litigation Policy as well as the settled principle of law that once a question of law has been settled, it should be made applicable to all similarly situated employees, the Bench pointed out.“However, the petitioner has continued filing writ petitions on such settled principles. Hence, the present petition, filed after a period of three years from the order dated 21.03.2023 passed by the Tribunal, not only raises an already settled issue but also reflects that the concerned soldier has not been granted the benefit despite having the order in his favour for the last three years,” the Bench said.In March 2023, the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal had granted pensionary benefits to several soldiers on the basis of similar cases decided earlier, which was later challenged by the Centre.The government counsel contended before the High Court that while passing orders in 2023, the AFT had missed the instructions issued by the government in 1987, according to which 10 months’ service in a particular rank prior to retirement was mandatory for fixing pension in that rank, whereas the respondent’s service was six months.The Bench observed that the same issue had come up before the Principal Bench of the AFT and in 2017 it was held that the benefit of pension is to be granted keeping in view the last wages drawn in the same rank by the concerned officers or soldiers before retirement.The judgment has already been implemented by the Union of India.“Once a similar benefit has already been extended to other officers/soldiers, the challenge to the grant of such benefit by the Union of India after a period of three years is liable to be rejected, and the same is accordingly rejected,” the Bench ruled.