Employee may get both disability, invalid pension: HC

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Chandigarh, July 20

In a significant judgment on the grant of benefits to employees suffering from medical issues, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that they may be granted disability pension, besides invalid pension. The ruling came as the Bench drew a distinction between disability and invalid pension.

Justice Jagmohan Bansal asserted invalid pension was granted to every employee for the services rendered if he had completed a specified period. Disability pension, on the other hand, was granted irrespective of service length.

The ruling came on a petition filed against the Union Government and other respondents by Yogendra Kumar Saraswat through counsel Bhim Sen Sehgal and Rajesh Sehgal. The Bench, during the course of hearing, was told that the petitioner had served the CRPF for 17 years, but was diagnosed with major depression and anxiety disorder (post-traumatic) while posted in Guwahati.

Assessed with 80 per cent disability, he was served a notice for invalidation from service. He agreed with the medical board’s opinion and was declared “medically invalidated out” from the CRPF service from July 2019.

Justice Bansal observed the petitioner was granted invalid pension, but was denied disability pension as the respondent-authority was of the opinion that he had not suffered illness attributable to service.

Justice Bansal asserted: “Invalid pension is fundamentally a pension which is granted to every employee on account of services rendered by him. Invalid pension is granted if an employee has completed specified period of service, whereas disability pension is granted irrespective of length of service, however on account of disability attributable to service or has been aggravated by service”.

Referring to the Central Civil Services (Extra Ordinary) Pension Rules, Justice Bansal added disability pension scheme was quite clear. An employee could be granted disability pension, apart from invalid pension, subject to compliance of conditions mentioned in the rules. He added the medical board had given its opinion that petitioner had suffered disease on account of stressful work condition and working at different environmental conditions. As such, the court found substance in the petitioner’s contention.

Justice Bansal directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner’s case for disability pension, apart from already granted invalid pension.