Rules No Service Connection to Fatal Accident For Special Pension Benefits
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the widow of a CRPF Sub-Inspector who died in a road accident during casual leave is not entitled to Liberalized Family Pension, special pension benefits or Ex-Gratia Compensation. The Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur held that the death must have a direct link to official duties for such benefits to apply.
Background
Surender Yadav, serving with the 181st Battalion of CRPF in Srinagar, took 14 days of casual leave in November 2014 to visit his ailing father. On November 9, 2014, he met with a fatal motorcycle accident while traveling with his family in Alwar. A Court of Inquiry (COI) later classified his death as occurring ‘on duty’ and recommended benefits for his family.
However, the CRPF rejected the claim, stating that Yadav’s death was unrelated to his official duties. His widow, Leela Yadav, challenged this decision in the Delhi High Court.
Key Arguments
Leela Yadav argued that government rules classify deaths under different categories, and her husband’s case fell under Category C (accidents during duty) or Category D (deaths due to violence in terrorist-prone areas). She also pointed out that the COI deemed him ‘on duty’ at the time of death.
The Union government countered that Yadav’s death was a personal accident unrelated to duty and fell under Category A (natural causes or unrelated accidents). It also highlighted that the widow had already received compensation from the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT).
Court’s Findings
No Direct Link to Duty – The court ruled that Category C requires a clear connection between duty and the accident. Since Yadav was on personal leave, the accident was unrelated to his service.
Casual Leave Does Not Imply ‘On Duty’ for Compensation – While casual leave is not a break in service, the court held that special benefits require a direct service connection.
No Evidence of Terrorist Involvement – The COI speculated about a possible terrorist link due to Yadav’s posting in Srinagar, but the court found no supporting evidence.
No Double Compensation – The widow had already received MACT compensation, and the court ruled that additional Ex-Gratia Compensation would amount to double benefits.
Verdict
The High Court dismissed the widow’s petition, ruling that she was only entitled to a normal family pension, which had already been granted. It reaffirmed that special pension benefits apply only when a death occurs in direct connection with official duties.
