The court emphasized the liberal construction of pension provisions in favor of officers boarded out on medical grounds and the retrospective application of amended pension rules.

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to re-appoint the petitioner with full seniority, promotion & back wages. Alternatively, petitioner seeks grant of invalid pension or any other pension to rehabilitate the petitioner.

2. Petitioner was appointed as Constable (GD) on 26.04.2010. Petitioner has been boarded out vide letter dated 18.08.2017 on the ground that he was suffering from `Paranoid Schizophrenia with secondary depression with 80% disability'. Petitioner was categorized as Shape-5 (P) and declared unfit for service as a combatant in Armed Forces.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had suffered the ailment on account of an incident that petitioner has witnessed and the illness is attributable to military services and as such the petitioner is entitled to disability pension.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the decision of the coordinate bench of this Court dated 15.07.2022 in W.P. (C) No. 3884/2010 titled `Roshan Lal Vs. UOI & Ors.'. Learned counsel further relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in Dharamvir Singh Vs. Union of India (2013) 7 SCC 316; to contend that the pension provisions have to be liberally construed in favour of the officer who is boarded out on medical grounds.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents contends that petitioner has only rendered 7 years 5 months and 25 days of service and as thus is not entitled to pensionary benefits. She submits that in terms of Rule 38 of the CCS Pension Rules, 1972, since petitioner has rendered less than 10 years of service, he is dis-entitled to grant of any pension. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner falls in category `C' of Standing Order 4 of 2011 and has been declared `unfit' on the ground of psychiatric disease and as such cannot be continued in service or re- appointed and the termination of the petitioner was justified.

6. We find merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents in so far as the boarding out of the petitioner is concerned on the medical ground. The petitioner being category `C' and found to be suffering from a psychiatric disease has been boarded out in term of Standing Order 4 of 2011. To that extent, the action of the respondent cannot be faulted and petitioner cannot be directed to be reinstated in service.

7. Coming to the question of grant of invalidation pension, the Supreme Court in Dharamvir Singh (Supra) has held as under:

"32. Para 1 of Chapter II - ''Entitlement:

General Principles" specifically stipulates that certificate of a constituted medical authority vis-a-vis invalidating disability, or death forms the basis of compensation payable by the Government the decision to admit or refuse entitlement is not solely a matter which can be determined finally by the medical authorities alone. It may require also the consideration of other circumstances e.g. service conditions, pre- and post-service history, verification of wound or injury, corroboration of statements, collecting and weighing the value of evidence, and in some instances, matters of military law and dispute. For the said reasons the Medical Board was required to examine the cases in the light of etiology of the particular disease and after considering all the relevant particulars of a case, it was required to record its conclusion with reasons in support, in clear terms and language which the Pension Sanctioning Authority would be able to appreciate.

33. In spite of the aforesaid provisions, the Pension Sanctioning Authority failed to notice that the Medical Board had not given any reason in support of its opinion, particularly when there is no note of such disease or disability available in the service record of the appellant at the time of acceptance for military service. Without going through the aforesaid facts the Pension Sanctioning Authority mechanically passed the impugned order of rejection based on the report of the Medical Boar