Petitioner is an ex-service man. He has joined in the Indian Air Force on 18/9/1956 and had been discharged from service on medical grounds on 4/10/1966, thus having to his credit more than ten years of service. His claim is that his application for invalid pension, has not been considered and by Ext.P4 dated 12/1/1999, his claims had been rejected. It has been pointed out that records are not maintained after 25 years and his application came after a period of thirty years and therefore it was practically impossible to consider his application with any amount of certainty. Prima facie, the approach, indeed, is understandable.

2. Sri.Anil Kumar appearing for the petitioner submits that invalid pension could not have been denied, and especially taking note of the condition of the petitioner, since he was afflicted by mental sickness and the case deserved relaxed standards. He had also relied on a decision of this Court in O.P.No.12684/1991, where in almost similar circumstances, when the application had been rejected as belated this Court had directed pension to be paid to the retired employee and with slight modifications in W.A.No.1271/1992, the order had been upheld.

3. I had heard the Additional Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents. With reference to the counter affidavit filed, he had submitted that it was a case where the petitioner had no plea that his discharge was due to any cause arising out of military service or aggravated by such service. Reference had been made by Ext.R2 and particularly, para 7(c) thereof, which is extracted herein below:-

7(c) If a disease is accepted as having arisen in service, it must also be established that the conditions of Air Force Service determined or contributed to the onset of the disease and that the conditions were due to the circumstances of duty in air force service.

Counsel had also brought to my notice a decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in S.L.P.(C) No.9366/96, and the Court had held that in each case, when a disability pension is sought for and resulted in a claim, it must be affirmatively established, as a fact, as to whether the injury sustained was due to military service or was aggravated which contributed to invalidation for the military service. However, the counsel has produced Ext.R4 which shows the revised regulations of Invalid Pension and Gratuity. Para 171 of the regulations captioned as C.S.No.120/VII/73 provides that an individual who is invalidated out of service on or after 1st April, 1964, on account of a disability neither attributable to nor aggravated by service, could be eligible to claim invalid pension provided he had put in more than ten years of service. The relevant portion of Section V could be extracted hereinbelow:-

SECTION V INVALID PENSION AND GRATUITY

Extent of Application

170. The Regulations in this section shall apply to such of airmen (including WOs/MWOs granted honorary commissions while on the effective list), referred to in Regulation 101 as do not opt for Old Pension Code.

Invalid Pension/Gratuity when admissible-

171. An invalid pension/gratuity will be admissible in accordance with the Regulations in this Section to

(a) an individual who is invalided out of service on or after 1st April, 1964 on account of a disability neither attributable to nor aggravated by service;

(b) an individual who is invalided out of service on or after 1st April, 1964 on account of a disability assessed at less than 20% and which is attributable to or aggravated by service; and

(c) a low medical category individual who is discharged from service on or after 1st April, 1964 for lack of alternative employment compatible with his low medical category subject to the proviso that in the case of an individual discharged prior to 18th April, 1967, the invalid pension will be payable from 18th April, 1967.

Minimum Qualifying Service-

172. The minimum period of qualifying service required for an invalid pension is 10 years. For less than 10 years qualifying service an invalid gratuity only shall be admissible.

Petitioners claim appears to be squarely coming within the above said rule as the petitioner had been discharged in 1966 and there is no dispute that he had put in more than ten years of service. There is also a little though scanty, materials to show that he do come within the parameters prescribed by the regulations.

4. In the aforesaid circumstances, though the claims highlighted are belated by any standards, it will be only fair that a fresh consideration has to be given to the claims that had been urged. I therefore direct the first respondent to consider the claims of the petitioner if application is filed by him within a period of one month from today, in the light of Ext.R4. His eligibility for pension may be examined latest by 31st of December 2002. In the light of judgment in W.A.No.1271/1992, if he is able to substantiate his eligibility I am of the view that petitioner will be entitled to pension, only from the date of such order, though normally it would have been admissible from an earlier date.

The Original Petition is disposed of with the above direction.