Disabled ward of ex-servicemen entitled to lifetime pension if they were dependent on it at time of accident: AFT
Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium
Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only BenefitsVijay Mohan
Chandigarh, January 3
About 20 years after family pension being paid to him was stopped, the Armed Forces Tribunal has held that the disabled ward of an ex-serviceman is entitled to family pension for life if he had earlier been dependent on the pension.
According to pension rules, ordinary family pension is paid to the ward of a government employee whose both parents have died till the age of 25 years, of for lifetime if disability renders him unable to earn an income.
The recipient’s father had died in 1994 and his mother in 1996. He was sanctioned family pension thereafter which was to be paid till 2004, when he attained the age of 25 years. However, in 2000, he met with an accident which resulted in 65 percent disability for life.
On learning that wards of Armed Forces pensioners suffering from any mental or physical disorder or disability that makes them unable to earn a livelihood shall be granted family pension for life with effect from September 2012, he submitted a representation for grant of family pension.
The claim, however, was rejected by the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions), Allahabad, on grounds that none of his deceased parents during their life time ever declared his disability and he had declared his disability after death of his parents.
The Tribunal’s Bench comprising Justice Anil Kumar and Maj Gen Sanjay Singh observed that it was a case of an individual, who is 65 per cent disabled due to tragic accident in which his lower right limb was shortened, rendering him unable to earn living on his own even on attaining the age of 25 years. Otherwise he was eligible for grant of family pension. On the other hand, the objections raised by the respondents, though important for the purposes of record and scrutiny, seem to be of technical nature only.
“When the applicant met with an accident, he was in receipt of family pension, meaning thereby he was dependent on his deceased parents. Therefore, we are of the view that he is entitled to grant of family pension,” the Bench said.
“After accident, the applicant has become 65 per cent handicapped for life and now it is vital factor of his survival. He is entitled to get family pension for life,” the Bench ruled while quashing the order rejecting his pension claim.