- (1.) Sukhpal Kaur widow of Ranjit Singh, Postal Assistant, Village Sheikhupura, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo, District Bhatinda has preferred the present Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order dated 14.5.2004, Annexure P-10, and claiming disability pension @ 100% in respect of Ranjit Singh from 23.12.1989 to 22.11.2002 and family pension from 23.11.2002 onwards along with interest.
(2.) Ranjit Singh, No. 80708 was enrolled as Postal Assistant on 14.12.1985. He was medically examined before joining the said service. During service, said Ranjit Singh developed Tuberculosis and medical certificate dated 8.8.1989 was issued by the Medical Authorities, Civil Hospital, Bhatinda as Annexure P-1. Pursuant to the said medical opinion, Ranjit Singh was relieved with effect from 22.12.1989. He requested for disability pension and was subjected to examination by a Board which recorded on 9.3.1995 that Ranjit Singh was permanently incapacitated with 100% disability. Despite claim for disability pension, he was not granted any relief. His claim for disability pension was declined on the ground that Ranjit Singh has not completed 10 years of qualifying service. The petitioner approached Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench and the said Tribunal vide judgment dated 14.5.2004 declined the claim of the petitioner on the same ground that Ranjit Singh had not completed 10 years of qualifying service. It was held that Rules 38 and 49 of Pension Rules have to be read together and on that count, neither invalid pension nor the family pension to the petitioner was allowed to the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the said order of Central Administrative Tribunal in the present writ petition.
(3.) To properly appreciate the facts of the case, Rules 38 and 49 of the Government of India's Orders, Central Civil Services Rules are re-produced as under :- "38. Invalid pension. - (1) Invalid pension may be granted if a Government servant retires from the service on account of any bodily or mental infirmity which permanently incapacitates him for the service. (2) A Government servant applying for an invalid pension shall submit a medical certificate of incapacity from the following medical authority namely :- (a) A Medical Board in the case of Gazetted Government servant and of non- Gazetted Government servant whose pay, as defined in Rule 9(21) of the Fundamental Rules, exceeds (two thousand and two hundred rupees) per mensem; (b) Civil Surgeon or a District Medical Officer or Medical Officer of equivalent status in other cases. Note 1. - No medical certificate of incapacity for service may be granted unless the applicant produces a letter to show that the Head of his Office or Department is aware of the intention of the applicant to appear before the medical authority. The medical authority shall also be supplied by the Head of the Office or Department in which the applicant is employed with a statement of what appears from official to be the age of the applicant. If a service book is being maintained for the applicant, the age recorded therein should be reported. Note 2. - A lady doctor shall be included as a member of the Medical Board when a woman candidate is to be examined. (3) The form of the Medical Certificate to be granted by the medical authority specified in sub-rule (2) shall be as in Form 23. (4) Where the Medical Authority referred to in sub-rule (2) has declared a Government servant fit for further service of less laborious character than that which he had been doing, he should, provided he is willing to be so employed, be employed, on lower post and if there be no means of employing him even on a lower post, he may be admitted to invalid pension." "49. Amount of pension. - (1) In the case of a Government servant retiring in accordance with the provisions of these rules before completing service of ten years, the amount of service gratuity shall be calculated at the rate of half month's emoluments for every completed six monthly period of gratuity qualifying service. (2) In the case of a Government servant retiring in accordance with the provision of these rules before completing qualifying service of ten years, the amount of service qualifying shall be calculated at the rate of half month's emoluments for every completed six monthly period of qualifying service. (b) In the case of a Government servant retiring in accordance with the provisions of these rules before completing qualifying service of thirty-three years, but after completing qualifying service of ten years, the amount of pension shall be proportionate to the amount of pension admissible under Clause (a) and in no case the amount of pension shall be less than (rupees three hundred and seventy five per mensem). (c) Notwithstanding anything contained in Clause (a) and Clause (b) the amount of invalid pension shall not be less than the amount of family pension admissible under sub-rule (2) of Rule 54. (3) In calculating the length of qualifying service, fraction of a year equal to (three months) and above shall be treated as a completed one-half year and reckoned as qualifying service. (4) The amount of pension finally determined under Clause (a) or Clause (b) of sub-rule (2), shall be expressed in whole rupees and where the pension contains a fraction of a rupee it shall be rounded off to the next higher rupee. (5) Deleted. (6) Deleted." So, from a reading of the above-said Rules, it is clear that so far as grant of invalid pension is concerned, no period of service has been prescribed. So far as Rule 49 aforesaid is concerned, that relates to regular pension of the employees and does not deal with invalid pension. In authority Harphool Singh (Deceased) through Lrs. v. Union of India and another, 2004 6 SLR 731, it has been held that the petitioner is entitled to invalid pension under Rule 38 irrespective of the service rendered. In that case, since the employee had died, as such, the respondents were directed to pay family pension to the widow of the deceased. In authorities Sundra Devi v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and another, 2007 2 SCT 473; Sharmila Devi v. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, 2007 2 SCT 473 and Shalini Devi v. The Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited, 2006 1 SCT 383, Division Benches of High Court have held under Family Pension Scheme, the qualifying service is one year. So, in view of above discussion, the impugned order stands quashed. The petitioner is held entitled to claim invalid pension under Rule 38 for the period from 23.12.1989 to 22.11.2002 and family pension from 23.11.2002 onwards in accordance with the Rules.;