##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

206 CWP-9985-2015 (O&M)

Decided on : 29.01.2026

DAVINDER SINGH

...Petitioner.

Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ….Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI

PRESENT: Mr. Manish Prabhakar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Bharat Bhushan Sharma, Senior Panel counsel

for the respondents-UOI.

****

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral)

1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned order

dated 28.02.2014 (Annexure P-1) passed by Armed Forces Tribunal,

Regional Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Tribunal’) and

order dated 31.07.2006 (Annexure P-2) and 12.11.2007 (Annexure P-3)

passed by respondent No. 1, by which, the benefit of disability pension of the

petitioner has been declined.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the benefit of

disability pension has been declined to the petitioner only on the ground that

the disability so suffered has been found to be neither attributable to nor

aggravated by the military service. But, as per the instructions dated

16.07.2020, which have been made operative from 04.01.2019 issued by the

Government of India, by which, invalid pension has been granted to the

soldiers, who were invalidated out from the service due to the injury even if

the same which is neither attributable to nor aggravated by the military

service. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

respondents are under an obligation to grant the invalid pension to the

1 of 7

::: Downloaded on - 03-02-2026 19:21:44 :::

2

CWP-9985-2015 (O&M)

petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that at every stage

the claim has only been raised for disability pension and not for invalid

pension and therefore, the said claim has only been considered and even as of

now, the claim for the grant of invalid pension has not been raised and

therefore, raising the said issue in the present petition does not arise.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone

through the case file with their able assistance.

5. It may be noticed that as a welfare state, the State is bound to

give the relief whatever, a soldier is entitled for especially when the soldiers

are recruited to fight for the country.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent- UOI has not been able to

dispute that as per the instructions dated 16.07.2020, which have been made

operative from 04.01.2019 issued by the Government of India, invalid

pension is liable to be paid in case a soldier has suffered injury due to which,

the said soldier has been invalidated out/discharged from service even if, the

injury so occurred is neither attributable to nor aggravated by the military

service.

7. The argument raised by the learned counsel for the respondent

is that as per the said notification, the invalid pension can only be granted to

a soldier who were/are in service on or after 04.01.2019, whereas the

petitioner was discharged from service on 14.04.1973 in low medical

category as he was found to be suffering from disability (i) Fracture Talus

RT and (ii) Fracture 12 Dorsal VERTEBRA owing to the injury

suffered as he fell down from cycle under the influence of alcohol. It

may be noticed the said issue has already been

2 of 7

::: Downloaded on - 03-02-2026 19:21:45 :::

3

CWP-9985-2015 (O&M)

dealt with by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India while passing the judgment

in in SLP(C) No.20339 of 2011 titled as Union of India and others vs.

P.A.Thomas, decided on 14.03.2019 The relevant paragraphs of the said

judgment are as under:-

“Rules 38 and 49 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972

have been amended on 4.1.2019 in the following manner: “2. In the

Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (i) in rule 38, for sub-

rule (1) and sub-rule (2), the following subrules shall respectively be

substituted, namely:

“(1) The case of a Government servant acquiring a disability, where

the provisions of section 20 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Act, 2016 S