$~16

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of decision: 15.07.2022

+

W.P.(C) 3884/2010

ROSHAN LAL

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr.S.K. Anand, Advocate

Versus

UOI AND ORS

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr.Dev P. Bhardwaj, CGSC with

Ms.Anubha Bhardwaj & Mr.Sarthak

Anand, Advs. for UOI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

J U D G M E N T (oral)

CM APPLN. 33289/2021 (u/S 151 by the petitioner) & CM APPL.

30887/2022 (u/S 151 CPC by respondents No.1,2,4,5 & 7) & W.P.(C)

3884/2010

1.

Today, the above captioned first application has been listed for

hearing whereby petitioner has prayed for a direction to respondents to grant

him disability pension under the provisions of CCS (Extra Ordinary

Pensions) Rules and OM No. 45/22/97P&PW (C) dated 03.02.2000, in place

of invalid pension and also to grant interest @ 15 % from the date of

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002748

invalidation i.e. 15.07.1993 till date of payment to the petitioner.

2.

Pertinently, the subject petition has been filed seeking a writ of

mandamus directing the respondents No. 2,5 and 7 to release invalid pension

to the petitioner; to release the admissible benefits as are released to the

incumbent who are sent out of service on medical grounds for the injuries

sustained during duty; and to examine the possibility of granting disability

pension to the petitioner. However, by virtue of CM APPLN. 33289/2021,

the petitioner has in fact sought to amend the prayers and relief made in the

main petition.

3.

On 04.04.2022 when this application came up for hearing, learned

Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) appearing on behalf of

respondents submitted that the respondents have decided to release the

invalid pension to the petitioner w.e.f. 15.07.1993 and final decision shall be

taken before the next date. On the next date of hearing i.e. 10.05.2022,

learned CGSC had informed that the final decision is yet to be taken on

release of invalid pension to the petitioner.

4.

However, on 11.07.2022, above cpationed second application CM

APPLN. 30887/2022 was filed on behalf of respondents No.1,2,4,5 & 7,

which has come up for hearing today, whereby respondents are seeking to

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002748

withdraw the statement made before this Court on 04.04.2022 by learned

CGSC appearing on their behalf that the “respondents have decide to release

the invalid pension to the petitioner and final decision thereon shall be

taken” on the ground that the case of petitioner for consideration of invalid

pension is neither covered under the CCS (Pension) Rule, 1972 nor CCS

(EOP) Rule, 1939. Respondents have also prayed for consideration of the

case on merits.

5.

During the course of hearing in these applications, this Court is of the

opinion that the issues raised in these applications pertain to the subject

matter of this petition and to arrive at a just decision, it would be appropriate

to decide these applications along with the petition itself in view of

contentions raised in the petition; counter affidavit and the applications filed

on behalf of respondents.

6.

The brief facts, giving rise to the present petition are that on

13.04.1988, the petitioner was selected as Constable in Central Reserve

Police Force (CRPF) and after completing his basic training at CRPF Group

Centre, Bhubaneshwar, Orissa, he was posted at 39 Bn. CRPF, Imphal

(Manipur) and was later shifted to Delhi in 1990.

7.

Pursuant to a proposal floated by the respondent No.3, petitioner

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002748

showed his willingness to apply and was selected in respondent No.3-

National Security Guard (NSG) and was relieved from the services of CRPF

on 10.10.1991.

8.

It is averred in the petition that the person who performs the duty as

Commando