Disability pensions can be granted if a service-related disease causes disability, even if not specified in the governing rules.

JUDGMENT

The point of polemics that crops up for consideration is whether disability pension could be granted to a person who served in the frontiers or in difficult areas as a Rifleman could be denied disability pension solely on the ground that the disease from which he is afflicted, is not included in the schedule I-A of the Extra Ordinary Pension Rules to the Central Civil Services [ CCS (EOP) Rules ]. Before adverting to the said question it is apposite to consider objection raised by the respondents on the maintainability of this writ petition on the ground of territorial jurisdiction as also limitation. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in the light of a Division Bench judgment of this Court inSelvin Abraham v. Punjab & Sind Bank reported in 2013 (3) KLT 481 , the objection regarding the lack of territorial jurisdiction cannot be sustained. True that in the decision by the learned single judge in Rajesh's case (Supra) it was held that only a material/essential or integral part of the cause of action occurred within the jurisdiction of this Court then only it could confer the territorial jurisdiction on this Court. On carefully scanning the decision of the Division Bench in Selvin Abraham's case (Supra) I have no hesitation to hold that the factual situation obtained in this case and the factual situation obtained in Selvin' Abraham's case are similar and therefore the decision in Selvin' Abraham's case is applicable in this case. It is a fact that in this case after getting discharge from service the petitioner applied for disability pension while residing in Kerala. The respondents passed an order and the same was communicated to the petitioner in his address at Kerala. True that he had served Assam Rifles in Shillong and he was discharged from service while serving there. But at the same time, in the light of the decision of the Selvin' Abraham's case, I am of the view that the contention raised in the light of the decision in Rajesh's case (Supra) cannot be upheld. In short, I am of the view that this Court has jurisdiction to deal with the issues involved in this case. Regarding the question of limitation, it is to be noted that the respondents raised that question relying on Ext.P5 and Anx. R5. It is to be noted that Anx.R5 did not contain any reason at all. Indeed, it is only a communication to the petitioner regarding the out come of the decision on his application for disability pension by the authorities. It is to be noted that a copy of Anx.R4 was not at all communicated or was not marked to the petitioner. It is also relevant to note that in this case, on being aggrieved by Ext.P5 the petitioner preferred Ext.P6 and the first respondent did not consider the same. Though the petitioner specifically stated that Ext.P6 representation was submitted to the first respondent, the first respondent had not refuted the factum of its receipt. When an authority received a representation and when that authority is competent to consider the same, the delaying the matter of consideration by that authority cannot be a reason for defeating the right of the person who sought for relief. In this context it is to be noted that disuse of power is more contemptuous than abuse or misuse of power. Hence, I do not find any reason to uphold the objection regarding the maintainability. Now, I will consider the aforementioned question. This question arises for consideration in the following factual back ground :- The petitioner was enlisted into Assam Rifles as a Rifleman on 6.12.1966. After rendering about more than 14 years of service, he was discharged from his service on medical ground with effect from 4.2.1981. On his retirement, he appeared before the Medical Board held at Shillong on 10.3.1981 and his disability was assessed as 60% with diagnosis 'ISCHAEMIC HEART DISEASE AND BRONCHIAL ASTHAMA'. Subsequent his discharge from service, he was granted with invalid pension @ Rs.81/- per month and relie