Anu Devi Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

We have heard Ms. P. Awasthi, learned Advocate, who has appeared on behalf of the petitioner through video conferencing and Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned Central Government Counsel for the respondents.

¶20

The petitioner has questioned the order dated 06.03.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter to be referred as ‘Tribunal’) Guwahati Bench in O.A. No.040/00011/2023 rejecting her claim for getting disability pension along with the invalid pension on the sole ground that her condition of Rheumatoid Arthritis was aggravated while she was in service.

¶21

The records reveal that the petitioner worked as a Cleaner in the Indian Air Force from where she took invalid pension for having suffered Rheumatoid Arthritis. On her claim, she was given the invalid pension. Later, she claimed for disability pension also, which was estimated at 40%. The Tribunal took note of the fact that the invalid and disability pensions are mutually exclusive and a person cannot get both the pensions at one time.

¶22

Invalid pension is meant for providing succour to a person, who during the course of service is rendered invalid because of any ailment or terminal illness. This is different from the disability pension where disability is

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

incurred by an employee which is solely attributable to the job profile. This would also include aggravation of the disability while remaining in service. For the payment of disability pension, the length of service and the percentage of the disability are counted in rational way, which counting is provided in the relevant pension Rules.

¶25

What the petitioner demands now is that she is getting invalid pension for her having developed Rheumatoid Arthritis but with a Doctor having confirmed that this disease of Rheumatoid Arthritis was aggravated while she was in service, she is entitled for being paid disability component in her invalid pension.

¶26

The Tribunal rightly rejected the prayer of the petitioner on the ground that a person cannot get these two distinct pensions simultaneously.

¶27

We are of the considered view that simultaneous receipt of both invalid pension and disability pension is not permissible. A claimant may be entitled to disability pension, but only after surrendering in invalid pension, as both cannot run in parallel.

¶28

Before the Tribunal, it appears that, there was no prayer for conversion of the pension, but for drawing disability pension in addition to the invalid pension already being received. Such claim is contrary to the Pension Regulations. The Tribunal therefore was justified in refusing interference.

¶29

The impugned order does not call for any correction.

¶30

However, it is clarified that nothing would prevent the petitioner from making a fresh representation, if deemed necessary, seeking conversion of the invalid pension to disability pension from the date of medical

¶31

Page No.# 4/4

¶32

certification, subject to the extant Rules, whereupon it would be open for the authorities to consider the same on merits, consistent with the law in that regard.

¶33

The writ petition is dismissed with the liberty, as noted above.

¶34

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Anu Devi v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anu Devi v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramendra Deka and 9 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

The Union of India and 9 Ors. Vs Santosh Kumar

Dipankar Chanda and 35 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

The Airports Authority India and 5 Ors. Vs Praveen vs and Anr.

M/S Mcleod Russel India Limited Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Ham -Ak Rural Development Foundation Vs National Commission for Indian System of Medicine and 11 Ors.