HIGH COURT OF DELHI
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG & PRATIBHA RANI, JJ.
Ram Devi – Appellant
Versus
Director General, BSF & Others – Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 3527 of 2013
Decided On : 27-05-2015
ex-gratia compensation - entitlement of widow of deceased Border Security Force personnel - BSF Act, 1968, Section 2(a) - Office Memorandum dated September 02, 2008 - Office Memorandum dated September 11, 1998
Fact of the Case:
Late Yatinder Singh, a Border Security Force personnel, died after completing patrolling duty. His widow claimed entitlement to ex-gratia compensation as per the Office Memorandum dated September 02, 2008. The respondents denied entitlement, leading to the issue of whether the petitioner is entitled to ex-gratia compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the widow is entitled to the ex-gratia lump sum compensation payable under the Office Memorandum dated September 11, 1998 as modified by the Office Memorandum dated September 02, 2008. The compensation payable was determined to be Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only).
Issues: Entitlement to ex-gratia compensation as per the Office Memorandum dated September 02, 2008.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the BSF Act, 1968, Section 2(a) and the Office Memorandums to determine the entitlement to ex-gratia compensation. It emphasized a liberal interpretation of 'active duty' and 'accident' in the context of the deceased personnel's death after completing patrolling duty.
Final Decision: The petitioner, widow of the deceased Border Security Force personnel, was held entitled to the ex-gratia lump sum compensation payable under the Office Memorandum dated September 11, 1998 as modified by the Office Memorandum dated September 02, 2008. The compensation payable was determined to be Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lacs only).
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.
1. Late Yatinder Singh was enrolled as a Constable with Border Security Force on June 30, 1989 and earned a promotion to the rank of Head Constable.
2. Posted with the 67th Bn. BSF, Late Sh.Yatinder Singh had to discharge duties at the Indo-Pak Line of Control in Kutch Area in the State of Gujarat because the 67th Bn. was deployed at said place. The Border Outpost 966 at Jagmal was the area to be patrolled by the Coy of the Battalion of which Late Yatinder Singh was a member of.
3. On December 16, 2010 Late Yatinder Singh was detailed to perform Ambush-cum-Patrolling Duty at the Border Outpost Jagmal from 00:30 hours to 06:30 hours and completing the duty he returned to the barrack at around 06:45 hours and was found unconscious by Ct. S.K. Alamgir, who rushed him to the mini medical inspection room from where he was immediately rushed to the nearest civil hospital at Radhanpur where he was declared brought dead. Postmortem on the dead body of Yatinder Singh was conducted on December 17, 2010 and as per the postmortem report the cause of death was ‘cardio respiratory arrest’ due to multi-organ diseases and in particular liver cirrhosis.
4. The petitioner claims that since her late husband died while on active duty he would be entitled to an ex-gratia compensation as per the Office Memorandum dated September 02, 2008. The respondents deny entitlement, and thus the only issue which arises for adjudication is: whether the petitioner is entitled to an ex-gratia compensation as per the OM dated September 02, 2008.
5. The case of the petitioner is that clause (a) of sub-Section 1 of Section 2 of the BSF Act, 1968 defines ‘active duty’ by a member of the Force as not only when engaged in operation against an enemy but includes patrolling duty or guard duty along the borders of the country. As per the petitioner the ex-gratia lump sum compensation is to be paid to the families of Government employees who die in the performance of their bona-fide official duty in situations covered by the Office Memorandum.
6. The case of the respondents is that the ex-gratia compensation payable under the Office Memorandum is under the four conditions contemplated by the Office Memorandum and that neither of them would attract the applicability of the Office Memorandum to the death of the late husband of the petitioner who, as per the respondents, died after completing the patrolling duty and when he was in his barrack.
7. Clause (a) of sub-Section 1 of Section 2 of the BSF Act, 1968 defines ‘Active Duty’ as under:-
“(a) ‘Active Duty’ in relation to a person subject to this Act, means any duty as a member of the Force during the period in which such person is attached to, or forms part of a unit of the Force –
(i) which is engaged in operations against an enemy, or
(ii) which is operating, at a picket or engaged on patrol or other guard duty along the borders of India,
and includes duty by such person during any period declared by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette as a period of active duty with reference to any area in which any person or class of persons subject to this Act may be serving;”
8. Relevant portions of the Office Memorandum dated September 02, 2008 on which the petitioner rests her case read as under:-
“OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Sub: Implementation of government’s decision on the recommendation of the Sixth Central Pay Commission – revision of provisions regulating pension/gratuity/ commutation of pension /family pension/disability pension /ex-gratia lump-sum, compensation
1. The undersigned is directed to state that in pursuance of Government’s decision on the recommendation of the Sixth Central Pay Commission the President is pleased to introduce the following modifications in the rules regulating pension/retirement/ death/Service Gratuity/Family pension/disability pension and ex-gratia lump-su
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.