Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Arun Dev Choudhury, J.
Mohan Singh - Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Defence, Govt. Of India, New Delhi and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)/7975/2018
Decided On : 12-02-2024
Disability Pension - Armed Forces - CCS (Pension Rules) 1972, Rules 1939 - Rule 49(2)(b), Rule 3(A) - The court discussed the provisions of Rule 49(2)(b) of the CCS (Pension Rules) 1972 and Rule 3(A) of the Rules 1939. It highlighted the legal principles regarding the entitlement to disability pension, the presumption of sound physical and mental condition at the time of entry into service, and the burden of proof on the employer to establish the discontent between the disease and the service in armed forces.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Rifleman in the Assam Rifles, was invalidated out from service due to 'Non Organic Psychosis'. The petitioner sought disability pension, which was rejected by the authorities. The petitioner contended that he was entitled to disability pension due to his service duration and the onset of his medical condition during service.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was entitled to disability pension as the medical condition arose during his service and was aggravated by it. The court held that the rejection of the petitioner's claim for disability pension was illegal and arbitrary.
Issues: The issues revolved around the entitlement to disability pension based on the petitioner's service duration and the attribution of his medical condition to his service.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the presumption of sound physical and mental condition at the time of entry into service and the burden on the employer to establish the discontent between the disease and the service in armed forces. It also clarified the distinction between invalid pension and disability pension, highlighting the absence of a qualifying service requirement for disability pension under Rule 3(A) of the Rules 1939.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the rejection of the disability pension claim, and directed the authorities to grant disability pension to the petitioner from the date of his discharge on medical ground.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Ms. A Devi, learned legal Aid counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. SS Roy, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. The present writ petition is filed assailing orders dated 04.10.2002 and 06.01.2011 whereby the claim of the petitioner for disability pension was rejected. The further grievance of the petitioner is that he preferred an representation against such decision on 21.04.2014 and the same has not yet been decided.
3. The brief fact leading to filing of the present writ petition are as under:
II. The petitioner, while reporting before the authorities concerned and rejoining his service on 14.12.1994, informed that he had developed abnormal mental behavior at his residence during his leave period. Accordingly, respondent No. 3/the Commandant, 15th Assam Rifles, regularized his period of absence of 245 days by granting him 66 days of Earned Leave, 60 days of Half Pay Leave and 116 days of Extraordinary Leave in terms of Clause 15 of the Assam Rifles Part-II order No. 03/156/96.
III. After rejoining his service on 14.12.1994, the petitioner was kept under medical supervision and was referred to No. 5 Air Force Hospital for his medical treatment and for further management on 09.01.1995. However, he was found to have suffered from “Non Organic Psychosis” by the Psychiatrics and was placed in Low Medical Category CEE (Temporary) w.e.f. 01.02.1995.
IV. His medical treatment, medical status as well as his health condition were reviewed by the Department of Mental Hospital, Tezpur and at 5th Air Force Hospital, Jorhat from time to time and as his medical condition did not improve, he was finally placed in Low Medical Category, CEE (Permanent) w.e.f. 01.02.1999.
V. Due to his abnormal mental behavior, it was felt difficult to retain him in defence service and as per the opinion of the Psychiatrics of 5th Air Force Hospital, Jorhat, the petitioner was invalidated out from service w.e.f. 31.03.2001 for Low Medical Category CEE (Psy) Permanent disability of “Non Organic Psychosis”. It was declared by the Medical Board that such disability is not attributable/aggravated to service conditions.
VI. The petitioner’s contention is that it is an admitted position that he was serving in the Assam Rifles since 25.11.1991 and was discharged from service on 31.03.2001, whereas his period of absence of 242 days in service was regularized by the Commandant of 15th Assam Rifles and as such, since 25.11.1991 to 31.03.2001, he had served as a Rifleman (General duty) in the Assam Rifles for a period of 9 years 4 months 6 days.
VII. It is apposite to record that the petitioner earlier approached this court by filing WP(C) No.3040/2002 seeking a direction to the authorities to grant the petitioner disability pension. This court disposed of the said writ petition by its order dated 16.05.2002 directing the respondents to complete the process of finalizing the matter as to granting disability pension on medical ground to the petitioner as per relevant rules with a liberty to the petitioner to approach this court, if he feels aggrieved by any decision passed by the authorities.
VIII. Pursuant to such decision of this Court, a medical examination was conducted and it was concluded that the petitioner was suffering from “non organic psychosis”, which was not attributable to and not aggravated by the service condition and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for disability pension. Being aggrieved by orders dated 04.1
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to disability pension for a medical condition arising during service and aggravated by it, as well as the burden of proof on the....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the continuing wrongs and recurring wrongs principle to service law disputes, along with the entitlement to disability pension u....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between disability pension and invalid pension under the CCS Pension Rules, emphasizing the eligibility criteria and the impact ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of disability pension under the applicable rules, emphasizing the principles of continuing cause of action and considering the ag....
Invalid pension can be granted for mental or physical infirmity before ten years of service under specific government rules, emphasizing the necessity of proper assessment and procedural fairness.
Court emphasized that disability not attributable to service must be substantiated by evidence, and any ambiguity favors the claimant in pension entitlement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of sound physical and mental condition upon entering military service, the onus of proof on the employer to show non-entitlement, a....
The absence of attribution of disability to service by the Medical Board leads to a presumption of service-related disability, warranting the grant of Disability Pension.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
