Punjab-Haryana High Court
Union Of India And Others vs Kulwinder Singh And Anothewr on 20 February, 2026
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi, Vikas Suri
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
109 CWP-5213-2026 (O&M)
Decided on : 20.02.2026
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
. .Petitioners
Versus
KULWINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER . . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI
PRESENT: Ms. Geeta Singhwal, Senior Panel Counsel
for the petitioners.
****
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral)
1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned order dated 22.11.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.2-Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh, ( hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') by which, the benefit of invalid pension has been allowed in favour of respondent No.1.
2. The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that once the benefit of disability pension was sought by respondent no.1 before the Tribunal and not the benefit of invalid pension, which has been granted, but the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction while granting the benefit of invalid pension to respondent No.1.
3. On being asked, as to whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the benefit of invalid pension is admissible to the respondent No. 1 or not.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to rebut the said fact that said benefit is admissible to respondent No. 1. Rather the said aspect was put up by the Tribunal to the petitioners as they had 1 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2026 00:34:50 ::: 2 CWP-5213-2026 (O&M) opposed the grant of the invalid pension to respondent No. 1 to which the petitioners argued that same is being declined on the ground that 10 years of service has not been rendered by respondent No. 1 which is a requisite condition, which facts are duly mentioned in paragraph No. 7 of the impugned order and the said argument of petitioners has been overruled by the Tribunal while granting the benefit of invalid pension to the respondent No. 1 by placing reliance upon the settled principle of law settled by the Three Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (s)- 20330/2011 titled as Union of India and others versus P. A. Thomas, whereby it has been held that the 10 years of service is not a condition precedent for grant of benefit of invalid pension.
4. As per the settled principle of law settled by the Three Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (s)-20330/2011 titled as Union of India and others versus P. A. Thomas, any officer serving with the Military, who had undergone the medical examination at the time of selection and was found fit but subsequently, he/she has been discharged from service before completing the qualifying service, is entitled to the benefit of invalid pension irrespective of the length of service.
The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are as under:
"Rules 38 and 49 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 have been amended on 4.1.2019 in the following manner:
"2. In the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (i) in rule 38, for sub-rule (1) and sub-rule (2), the following subrules shall respectively be substituted, namely: "(1) The case of a Government servant acquiring a disability, where the provisions of section 20 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 SLP(C) 20339/2011 2 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2026 00:34:51 ::: 3 CWP-5213-2026 (O&M) (49 of 2016) are applicable, shall be governed by the provisions of the said section: Provided that such employee shall produce a disability certificate from the competent authority as prescribed under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017. (2) If a Government servant, in a case where the provisions of section 20 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (49 of 2016) are not applicable, retires from the service on account of any bodily or mental infirmity which permanently incapacitates him for the service, he may be granted invalid pension in accordance with rule 49:
Provided that a Government servant, who retires from service on account of any bodily or mental infirmity which permanently incapacitates him for the service before completing qualifying service of ten years, may also be granted invalid pension in accordance with sub- rule (2) of rule 49 subject to the conditions that the Government servant-
(a) has been examined by the appropriate medical authority either before his appointment or after his appointment to the Government service and declared fit by such medical authority for Government service; and
(b) fulfills all other conditions mentioned in this rule for grant of invalid pension";
(ii) in rule 49, for sub-rule (2), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely:
"(2) Subject to the proviso to sub-rule (2) of rule 38, in the case of a Government servant retiring in accordance with the provisions of these rules after completing qualifying service of not less than ten years, the amount of pension shall be calculated at fifty per cent of emoluments or average emoluments, whichever is more beneficial to him, subject to a minimum of nine thousand rupees per mensem and maximum of one lakh twenty five thousand 3 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2026 00:34:51 ::: 4 CWP-5213-2026 (O&M) rupees per mensem." The said amendments having been placed before the SLP (c) 20339/2011 Court, the Court was of the view that further clarification was required which has now been made by a clarificatory Office Memorandum bearing No. 21/01/2016 P&PW(F) dated 12.2.2019 in the following terms:
"2. In this connection, it is clarified that the condition of qualifying service of ten years for grant of pension under Rule 49(2) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 shall not be applicable in the case of a Government servant retiring on Invalid Pension on account of any bodily or mental infirmity, under Rule 38. Accordingly, Invalid Pension at the rate of 50% of emoluments or average emoluments, whichever is more beneficial, subject to a minimum of nine thousand rupees per mensem and maximum of one lakh twenty five thousand rupees per mensem, shall be payable to a Government servant who retires under Rule 38 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 even before completing a qualifying service of ten years." Having perused the aforesaid clarification, we are of the view that the matter now stands adequately covered and would be governed by provisions of the amended Rules 38 and 49 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, which would be applied to all eligible cases. The special leave petition consequently shall stand disposed of in the above terms."
5 Learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to dispute the said proposition of law having been settled in P. A. Thomas's case (supra).
6. Once, as per the settled principle of law, the benefit of invalid pension was admissible to the respondent No. 1, and the same has already been granted by the Tribunal to respondent No. 1, while exercising its jurisdiction, the grant of the said benefit cannot be set-aside merely on the 4 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2026 00:34:51 ::: 5 CWP-5213-2026 (O&M) ground that the only benefit sought by respondent No. 1 was qua disability pension.
7. No other argument has been raised.
8. Hence, in the absence of any perversity being pointed out in the impugned order dated 22.11.2023 (Annexure P-1) either on the basis of the facts or the settled principle of law, no ground is made out for any interference by this Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
9. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE (VIKAS SURI ) JUDGE 20.02.2026 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No 5 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2026 00:34:51 :::