115 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 30.03.2026 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ........Petitioners VERSUS EX RECT BALJINDER SINGH ........Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Present: Mr. N.K Verma, Senior Panel counsel for the petitioners-Union of India.

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral)

1. In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the order dated 18.07.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent-Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) by which, the benefit of invalid pension has been granted in favour of the respondent for his service rendered from 30.12.2019 to 30.06.2020.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners-UOI submits that though, the disability of “BETA THALASSAEMIA MINOR (D-56.3)” suffered by the respondent was assessed at 10% for two years but, the said disability was assessed as neither attributable to nor aggravated by the Military service. Despite this fact, the benefit of invalid pension has been granted by the Tribunal.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that even the requisite qualifying service period of 10 years was not completed by the officer concerned. i.e. respondent, which is a mandatory condition enshrined in Regulation 198 of Pension Regulations for the Army –1961, wherein it is categorically stated that the minimum period of qualifying service actually rendered and required for grant of invalid pension is 10 years, which aspect has been ignored by the Tribunal while granting the benefit.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also argued that since the claimant herein i.e. respondent was only a recruit when he was invalided out of service, benefit of invalid pension could not have been granted to him being a recruit.

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

6. 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