SAHIB SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present writ petition, filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is to the order dated 28.04.2017 (Annexure P-2), whereby respondent No.3 has declined to grant the petitioner Constant Attendance Allowance (hereinafter referred to as 'CAA') under the provisions of Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939, as amended.

(2.) The reasoning in the impugned order to deny the said benefit, which is permissible to Rs.3000/- per month to the pensioner who retired on disability pension, is on account of the fact that the disability was not attributable to Government service but due to his own negligence and therefore it was held that the individual is not entitled for the CAA.

(3.) The said reasoning, on the face of it, apparently seems to be flawed, as there is no such condition in the Rules or in the instructions that the same would not be payable in case of negligence on the part of the employee. In order to appreciate the controversy, brief reference to the facts are to be noticed.