In a significant judgment, the Kerala High Court has directed the grant of extraordinary family pension to the widow of a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) constable who died while on duty. The court emphasized that in the absence of concrete evidence indicating that the deceased was in an inebriated state at the time of death, the Pension Accounting Office (PAO) cannot deny the pension benefits under the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1972.
The case revolved around a CRPF Constable General Duty, deployed in the 85th Battalion in Chhattisgarh, who tragically drowned in a water tank on March 24, 2016, during his service. Following his death, a Court of Inquiry (COI) was conducted by the CRPF to ascertain the circumstances surrounding the incident. The COI did not find any evidence suggesting that the constable was intoxicated at the time of the incident. Despite this, the PAO denied the widow's claim for extraordinary family pension, alleging that her husband was in an inebriated condition when the incident occurred.
Justice D.K. Singh, presiding over the case, scrutinized the findings of the COI, the post-mortem report, and the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report. None of these documents indicated that the deceased was under the influence of alcohol at the time of his death. The court observed that the PAO's decision to reject the pension claim was not substantiated by any material evidence. Justice Singh stated, "There is no finding either in the COI or postmortem report or in the FSL report to suggest that the husband of the petitioner was in an inebriated condition." He further noted that the CRPF authorities themselves had determined that the death occurred while the constable was on duty, reinforcing the widow's entitlement to the extraordinary family pension.
The court also referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Renu Devi v. Union of India (2020), which held that deaths occurring due to participation in sports events or adventure activities are considered as deaths in the performance of duty. This precedent underscores the principle that service-related activities, even those involving recreational aspects, fall within the scope of duty for the purposes of pension benefits.
In light of these considerations, the Kerala High Court directed the authorities to grant the extraordinary family pension to the petitioner under the CCS (Extraordinary Pension) Rules. This judgment reinforces the legal stance that pension benefits cannot be denied based on unsubstantiated allegations and highlights the importance of relying on concrete evidence when making determinations affecting the rights of beneficiaries.
This ruling serves as a crucial reminder to administrative bodies to base their decisions on factual evidence rather than presumptions. It also provides solace to families of personnel who lose their lives in the line of duty, ensuring that they receive the benefits they are rightfully entitled to without undue hindrance.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.