Firstly, the orders for Children Education Allowance for defence personnel have already been issued by the Ministry of Defence and the same alongwith claim forms can be viewed and downloaded by clicking here. Thanks to all those who have sent this in.
Secondly, in an important decision, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that injuries sustained while on annual leave would also be deemed attributable to military service for the purposes of grant of disability pension. Though there were decisions and counter decisions to this effect earlier too, the Hon’ble Court has held that if a person during his annual leave is not involved in any illegal activity when an accident occurs or injury is sustained, then disability pension cannot be denied on account of that particular injury. Injuries on ‘casual leave’ though have always been held as ‘attributable to service’ by Hon’ble Courts especially after a detailed decision on the same by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 1999 (Madan Singh Shekhawat Vs Union of India). It is however interesting to note that even after the ibid specific decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, disability pension claims are still being rejected by authorities especially that Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions) for injuries sustained during casual leave even when Courts of Inquiry have held such injuries as attributable to service. In fact, such actions are utterly opposed to the law laid by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
Secondly, in an important decision, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that injuries sustained while on annual leave would also be deemed attributable to military service for the purposes of grant of disability pension. Though there were decisions and counter decisions to this effect earlier too, the Hon’ble Court has held that if a person during his annual leave is not involved in any illegal activity when an accident occurs or injury is sustained, then disability pension cannot be denied on account of that particular injury. Injuries on ‘casual leave’ though have always been held as ‘attributable to service’ by Hon’ble Courts especially after a detailed decision on the same by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 1999 (Madan Singh Shekhawat Vs Union of India). It is however interesting to note that even after the ibid specific decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, disability pension claims are still being rejected by authorities especially that Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions) for injuries sustained during casual leave even when Courts of Inquiry have held such injuries as attributable to service. In fact, such actions are utterly opposed to the law laid by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
14 comments:
Dear Navdeep,
Thanks for updating with latest information.
Best Wishes
Dear Navdeep,
you have said that in spite of a supreme court decison, the said decision is not being honoured by some govt agencies, in this case the pcda regarding disability pension allowability.
if that is the case then what is the sanctity of the Hon court's decision.Is their no remedy.???
Hi Navdeep,
There are lot rumours floating about signing of SAI for PB4. Is it possible to confirm the news? When are we likely to get the money??
By not paying arrears in march 2009,the govt stands to lose a lot of income by way of TDS.
I am sure the mandarins in the finance dept are aware of this and will take necessary action, to see that the arrears are paid the earliest.
Sir,
No PB4 pay and arrears. No news even. No information even through ur site which is suppose to provide authenticated and early information. Please.please give some information regarding PB4. Can we expect arrears in the form of adhoc payment.
Naik
Annual Leave and casual Leave have been regarded differently for awarding attributability. The purpose of both the leaves is, ostensibly the same, then why the disparity ?
casual leave is deemed 'on duty'
Hi Navdeep,
How significant is this decision? Earlier, Upholding a Delhi High Court order, A division bench of the apex court comprising Justice P P Naolekar and L S Panta a few months ago dismissed a special leave petition (SLP) filed by the Central government against the high court order.
Acting upon a petition filed by ex-soldier Mahavir Singh Narwal, a division bench of the HC, headed by Justice Vijender Jain had, in 2004, held that disabled personnel obtaining release on compassionate grounds would also remain entitled to disability pension.
The Central government had gone into appeal in the case and the Supreme Court stayed the operation of the HC order till it passed final orders in January and dismissed the SLP. but he Central govt as on date has not acknowledged this decision and implemented the courts verdict. Cannot this be contested at contempt of court but the armed forces or the affected people? The MoD / DGAFMS / PCDA does not seem to be aware or are not implementing the courts orders especially when it comes to implementing the disability pension issues. What could be the reason? And even the present judgement may fall into deaf ears?
regards.
JDS
@Moderator.
The decision in Mahavir S Narwal case has already been implemented. In fact many more decisions in the same vein followed after Mahavir Narwal's case. Now even the 6th CPC has recommended Disability Pension for voluntary retirees. IMHO, the Army HQ committed a cardinal mistake in going in for an appeal to the SC (which was thankfully dismissed) in Mahavir's case even though the Army HQ had time and again sought removal of the bar on DP for voluntary retirees. Hence when what was sought by the Army HQ from the govt was ultimately granted by the Delhi HC - the Army HQ went into appeal. Talk of cutting one's own feathers.
Dear Navdeep,
Do you have any information about the case of time scale Commanders vs Indian Navy, wherein they have been denied promotion to the rank of Captain.....it was scheduled to be heard in Supreme Court.......
Dear Navdeep,
Could you please elaborate and clarify the terms "attributable to military service" and the reason why only these words were selected /found suitable sustained under specific injuries.
Could you please comment whether these terms are any more relevant since the interpretation by judiciary appears to be diluted.
ANOMALIES YET AGAIN!!
The MOD letter has restricted the eligibility for claiming the Childrens Education Allowance (CEA) in case of Armed Forces personnel to schools located at their place of posting. This, in one swift stroke, would deprive thousands of servicemen, particularly PBORs whose families stay back at their native places, from the benifits of the CEA.
Also, what is not understood is that, if the schools where a child studies needs to be located at the place of posting, then obviously the service personnel cannot claim the "Hostel Subsidy" of Rs 3000/- pm also, as there would be no reason to put a child in a Hostel if the school is located at the place of posting itself!
Surprisingly, the above mentioned restrictions have not been placed upon the civil government servants as indicated by GOI letter dated 02 Sep 08.
Dear Maj Navdeep. How can i get a copy of this dorective which says that injury during AL can be attributable to service?
Thaks and regards
Dr RAHUL
pipraiya@yahoo.com
pipraiya@gmail.com
dear Navdeep sir request for confirmation to fact that i was on a/l and returning back to join my unit post leave and i met with an accident ..would be grateful if you could pls confirm is it attributable in abeyance with existing rules copy of our navy order is NO 8/03 DEFINITION OF DUTY FOR DECIDING ATTRIBUTABILITY
OR OTHERWISE TO SERVICE
(PN/7985)
1. Disablement or death shall be accepted as due to Naval service provided it is established that:-
2. The definition of the term ‘Duty’ for the purpose of determining attributability and entitlement to disability and family pensionaryy awards in case of accidents is laid down in GOI, MOD letter No. 1(1)/81/Pen-C dated 22 Nov 83 as amended from time to time. A person subject to the Navy Act is considered to be ‘on duty’:-
(a) When performing an official task, failure to do which would constitute an offence, triable under the Navy Act
(b) When moving from once place of duty to another place of duty irrespective of the mode of move ment.
(c) During the period of participation in recreation and other unit activities organized or permitted by he service authorities and during the period of traveling in a body or singly by a prescribed or organized route.
(d) When proceeding from his duty station to his leave station or returning to duty from his leave station ,provided entitled to travel at public expense i.e. on railway warrant, on concessional voucher or cash TA (irrespective of weather railway warrant/cash TA is admitted for the whole journey or for a portion only) in Govt transport or when road mileage is paid/payable for the journey.
rgds Cdr Tejinder
tediver@yahoomail.com
Post a Comment