EX-CONSTABLE VIRENDER SINGH vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~67 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 16812/2022 EX-CONSTABLE VIRENDER SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Virender Singh Tomar, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Subhash Tanwar (CGSC), Mr. Naveen, Mr. Sandeep Mishra, Mr. Harshit Deshwal, Advs. with Mr. Devender Singh (Dy. JAG) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA ORDER(ORAL) % 25.08.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. It is a matter of concern that the petitioner, despite having an opinion by the Medical Board in his favour, specifically stating that the disability (Trivial Mitral Regurgitation) from which he was found to suffer, 13 years after he had joined the respondent ITBP, has had to struggle for 3 years for his due entitlement to disability pension. 2. The law as regards disability pension is well settled. We have had an occasion to examine the entire legal position recently in our decision in UOI v Ex Sub Gawas Anil Madso1. Subsequently, the said 1 2025 SCC Online Del 2018 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PREETI W.P.(C) 16812/2022 Signing Date:27.08.2025 Page 1 of 3 10:04:35 decision has been followed by a coordinate bench in UOI v Balbir Singh2. The Supreme Court has also, in his decision in Bijender Singh v UOI3, specifically upheld the entitlement of persons who are found to suffer from disabilities many years after they joined service, and regarding whom there is no record of disability at the time when they joined, to disability pension. 3. Moreover, in the present case, there is an opinion by the Medical Board which specifically states that the disability from which the petitioner was found to be suffering was “due to stress and strain of service”. 4. Mr. Subhash Tanwar, CGSC who appears for the UOI does not have any sub