IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 26516 of 2007(F)
1. M.K.M. BADSHA (EX.CH A A NO.051872-NAVY)
... Petitioner
Vs
1. UNION OF INDIA,
... Respondent
2. PRINCIPLE CONTROLLER OF DEFENCE ACCOUNTS
3. THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN
For Respondent :SRI.MOHAN IDICULLA ABRAHAM, ADDL.CGSC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :06/02/2009
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No.26516 of 2007-F
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 6th day of February, 2009.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner who is an ex-serviceman and had served the Indian
Navy for 14 years, is seeking for payment of adequate pension with the
service element and the disability element applicable to his rank. He served
the Indian Navy for 14 years from 10.8.1968 to 31.8.1982. In January 1982
the petitioner was working in the Pilotless Target Aircraft Squadron in INS
Nilgiri. An accident occurred on 14.1.1982 while on duty. When he was
adjusting the R.P.M., the propeller hit his right hand causing serious
injuries. He had to undergo treatment for a long time and was medically
downgraded by the Medical Board which recommended to release him in
low medical category. The disability was found 30% attributable to naval
service. Thus, he was invalidated out of service after 14 years.
2. The petitioner had been requesting for sanction of pension which
was eventually considered by Ext.P2 wherein he has sanctioned disability
pension to the tune of Rs.40/- per month for the period from 1.9.1982 to
26.6.1984. After repeated representations and a re-assessment by the
Medical Board which assessed his disability at 30% permanent for life, he
WPC 26516/07 2
was sanctioned Rs.570/- per month with effect from 22.6.2004 for life.
Meanwhile, the Central Government had revised the minimum pension
including invalid pension and family pension to Rs.375/- initially on the
recommendation of the IVth Central Pay Commission and at Rs.1275/- on
the recommendation of the Vth Pay Commission. Again, it was revised by
the first respondent to Rs.1913/- per month with effect from 1.1.2004. The
disability element was also enhanced to Rs.1,900/- for 100% disability for
JCO with effect from 1.1.1996.
3. The applicability of the order granting minimum pension to such
pensioners was considered by this court while rendering Ext.P6 judgment.
Thereafter, by Ext.P7, the same was implemented in respect of the
petitioner therein. Even though there was subsequent revision in the
minimum pension, as far as the petitioner is concerned, he was informed by
Ext.P9 that he is granted disability pension at Rs.570/- only. This is under
challenge in this writ petition.
4. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit denying their
liability in the matter and supporting the orders issued. They are also
relying upon Ext.R2 regulations in support of their plea.
5. Actually, the issue that is pleaded by the petitioner is covered in
his favour by Ext.P6 judgment. Therein, this court was pleased to
WPC 26516/07 3
consider the effect of Ext.P3 therein (Order No.2/14/87-PIC dated 5.3.87
issued by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions,
Department of Pensioner’s Welfare), whereby Rs.375/- was fixed as
minimum pension with effect from 1.1.1986. The petitioner in that writ
petition was also disabled to the tune of 30% and was granted the minimum
pension as per the said order. But later, it was reduced to Rs.90/- per
month. The reduction and the consequent recovery was challenged in that
writ petition. The true effect of the said order was considered in paragraphs
6 and 7. The question was whether the said order is applicable only to
service pension and not the disability pension. After considering this
aspect, it was held in para 7 in the following terms:
“Ext.P3 is intended to benefit the low paid pensioners. It has to be
interpreted in a liberal way and not in a way to take away the
benefits. Plain terms of Ext.P3 speaks that it is applicable to all
pensioners. Words and mandate of Ext.P3 are very clear and cogent
and there is nothing in Ext.P3 limiting it only to service pensioners
given after retirement of particular period of service. In fact, it is
specifically stated that it is not only applicable to
superannuation/retiring pension and it is applied to invalid pension,
compensation and family pension. But, it is the minimum allowed.
In this case, disability pension was granted to the pensioner as he was
released from military due to the disability admitted attributable to
WPC 26516/07 4
the service. Ext.P3 is applicable to the petitioner. In fact, he was
paid the above with effect from 1.1.1986. But, respondent reduced
the pension to Rs.90/- per month and took steps to recover the
amount paid excess. On going through Ext.P3 and other averments, I
am of the opinion that petitioner is entitled to get the minimum
pension from 1.1.1986 as per Ext.P3 till 22.5.1995, the last date upto
which he was granted pension and 1.1.1986 to 22.5.1995, he is
entitled to get Rs.375/- per month. Ext.P4 is set aside. Respondents
are directed to pay the balance amount of pension for the period
1.1.1986 to 22.5.1996 at the minimum rate of Rs.375/- per mensem
after deducting the amount already paid to him. The amount should
be paid within three months from today failing which it will carry
12% interest from 22.5.1995 till its payment.”
6. Judged in the light of the above dictum, the petitioner herein is
entitled to succeed in this writ petition. As pointed out in the writ petition,
the minimum pension at Rs.375/- which was fixed from 1.1.1986 based on
the recommendation of the IVth Pay Commission, has been revised from
time to time. This is a case where the petitioner was discharged from
service consequent on sustaining a permanent disability which is
attributable to naval service and the disability is at 30%. Even though the
Medical Board reviewed it in the year 2004, there were no grounds to
discontinue the pension from 1984. Going by Ext.P4, sanction was granted
to waive the delay to conduct RSMV. At that point of time, the disability
WPC 26516/07 5
was assessed at 30% permanent for life. Ext.P5 will show that it is granted
with effect from 22.6.2004 for life. In fact, going by the dictum laid down
in Ext.P6 that the minimum pension is applicable to all pensioners, the
petitioner is entitled for the benefit of minimum pension considering the two
elements and it is subject to revision from time to time.
7. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P9 is quashed. The
respondents are directed to sanction minimum pension from 1.1.1986 to
1.1.1996 and the revised pension at Rs.1250/- from 1.1.1996 along with
service element and disability element applicable to him with all
consequential benefits including arrears at revised rates from time to time
within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. He will be entitled for any revision of pension sanctioned during
the pendency of the writ petition, if any.
The writ petition is allowed as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/