KAUSHALYA DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the widow of late Phagu Ram, who was Cosntable in Border Security Force (BSF) with Enrollment No. 67533209 in Battalion 53. According to the averments made in the petition, late Phagu Ram was recruited as constable in BSF in the year 1963 on selection by the Board including medical examination and he was found medically fit.. He continued to serve BSF till July 1972, when he was declared medically unfit for retention in the service and invalidated out. He was sent to home under critical physical condition and died on 20.12.1972. Petitioner claims to have made various representations to the respondents for family pension being widow of the deceased constable. She has explained the delay in filing this petition on the ground that, few months after the death of her husband, she suffered paralysis and her limbs became crippled. She lost considerable eye sight due to sufferings and ailment. It was only after long ailment, when she recovered and was able to file present writ petition. Her representations were responded to only in the year 1994 when the Directorate of Border Security Force, New Delhi directed the Commandant, 53 Battalion, BSF to examine the case of the petitioner. However, no decision has been communicated to her till date. Accordingly, petitioner seeks a direction for grant of pensionary benefits for the service rendered by her deceased husband spreading over a long period of nine years.

(2.) IN the reply filed by the petitioner, it is stated that the deceased husband of the petitioner was enrolled in 45 Battalion PAP on 23.4.1963 and thereafter embodied into 53 Battalion BSF on 1.6.1967. He had been confirmed in the rank of Constable w.e.f. 1.1.1971. Late constable was however, declared unfit for service in Border Security Force by a medical board of officers held on 5.7.1972 and he was invalidated out from service on 5.8.1972 under rule 25 of BSF Rules,1969. Regarding the claim of the petitioner for pensionary benefits, it has been stated that the deceased had not completed qualifying service of ten years at the time of his invalidating out of service in 1972 and hence he is not entitled to pensionary benefits. The claim of the petitioner was received from PAD ,BSF, New Delhi vide letter No. PAD/DISC/MISC/53 Bn/BSF/94 dated 5.12.1994. Accordingly, PAD was informed vide Signal No. A/7041 dated 23.3.1995 that the deceased husband of the petitioner was invalidated out from BSF service on 4.8.1972. Late constable having put less than 12 years qualifying service, was not found entitled to pension. Deceased has rendered only 9 years, 3 months and 12 days service, disentitling him for the pension.

(3.) MR . P.S. Dutta, learned counsel for petitioner has referred to CCS ( Pension) Rules. Rule 38 deals with invalidating pension, which reads as under: -