SONA DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed for grant of disability pension to the husband of the petitioner Ram Naresh Singh who was in the Air -Force Service and has been discharged on disability ground oh 14 -2 -1990. Disability was admitted to be 50% on Non -organic Phychosis. All other benefits have been made available to the petitioner 'shusband but the disability pension had not been granted as objection had been raised from the side of the Controller of Defence Accounts, Allahabad by referring to Regulation 153 of the Pension Regulations of Air -Force, 1961 (Part -I) which runs as follows: Unless otherwise is specifically provided, a disability pension may be granted to an individual who is invalidated from the service on account of disability which is attributable to or aggravated by Air -Force Service and is assessed at 20% or over.

(2.) SUCH sort of provisions are there regarding disability pension for Military personnel also. Those matters were taken up by the Apex Court in very many cases, one such case is (199) 6 S.C.C. (Madan Singh Shekhawat V/s. Union of India and Ors.) and it was also held that no question whether it is attributable to the service stress or not but if disability has grown during the service period then disability pension becomes a must. On the basis of such judgment of the Apex Court, this Court has held in the same manner as reported in 2000 (1) PLJR 1060 (Mahesh Pd. Mandal V/s. Union of India and Ors.). It has been argued strenuously from the side of the Counsel from the Union of India that along with such judgment has been passed but still then disability grown if not attributable to the service condition or stress of the service, disability pension cannot be allowed. The disability of the present case is of non -organic psychosis. It is the contention that such disability was there inherent on the husband of the petitioner and did not grow due to the stress of service on the petitioner and, as such, disability cannot be granted. If it was inherent on him then it ought to have been identified at the time of appointment in the Air Force Service itself as at the time of enrolment in the Air Force Service thorough medical examination was there and when that is not there, it must be constructed that definitely such disability has grown during the service period and must be attributable to the stress of the service. In that way by following the interpretation of the Rule made by the Apex Court and being followed by this Court, I am of the view that objection raised regarding non -grant of disability pension to the husband of the petitioner is non est in the eye of law and hence the petitioner 'shusband should be granted disability pension as per Rules of Air Force 1961 (Part -1) from the date of due. For nonpayment of the disability pension to the petitioner 'shusband for such a long period, he shall be entitled to an interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of discharge (14 -2 -90) till the date of payment.