IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : October 09, 2025 Union of India and others .. Petitioners Versus Ranjit Singh and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. Randeep Tanwar, Senior Panel Counsel, for the petitioners.

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)

1. In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the order dated 17.01.2025 (Annexure P-3) passed by the respondent No.2-the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) granting the invalid pension to respondent No.1, who had rendered service for 6 years and 125 days before being invalided out from service due to the medical disability suffered by him.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that once the respondent No.1 did not have minimum 10 years of service, he could not have been granted even the invalid pension.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the Regulations 197 of the Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961 have wrongly been interpreted to grant the benefit of invalid pension.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the record with his able assistance.

5. As per the settled principle of law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP(C) No.20339 of 2011 titled as Union of India and others vs. P.A.Thomas, decided on 14.03.2019 even if an officer is invalided out prior to the completion of 10 years of service, he/she is entitled for the grant of invalid pension. 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 SLP(C) 20339/2011 (49 of 2016) are applicable, shall be governed by the provisions of the said section:

Provided that such employee shall produce a disability certificate from the competent authority as prescribed under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017.

(2) If a Government servant, in a case where the provisions of section 20 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (49 of 2016) are not applicable, retires from the service on account of any bodily or mental infirmity which permanently incapacitates him for the service, he may be granted invalid pension in accordance with rule 49:

Provided that a Government servant, who retires from service on account of any bodily or mental infirmity which permanently incapacitates him for the service before completing qualifying service of ten years, may also be granted invalid pension in accordance with sub-rule (2) of rule 49 subject to the conditions that the Government servant-

(a) has been examined by the appropriate medical authority either before his appointment or after his appointment to the Government service and declared fit by such medical authority for Government service; and (b) fulfills all other conditions mentioned in this rule for grant of invalid pension“;

(ii) in rule 49, for sub-rule (2), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely: –

“(2) Subject to the proviso to sub-rule (2) of rule 38, in the case of a Government servant retiring in accordance with the provisions of these rules after completing qualifying service of not less than ten years, the amount of pension shall be calculated at fifty per cent of emoluments or average emoluments, whichever is more beneficial to him, subject to a minimum of nine thousand rupees per mensem and maximum of one lakh twenty five thousand rupees per mensem.”

The said amendments having been placed before the SLP (c) 20339/2011 Court, the Court was of the view that fu