New Delhi, Sep 17 (NationPress) The Delhi High Court has mandated that the Union government provide disability compensation to a former Border Security Force (BSF) officer who experienced mild to moderate hearing loss due to an IED explosion during his service in Jammu and Kashmir in 2001.

Chastising the authorities for their refusal to grant disability benefits to the petitioner, a bench comprising Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla stated that the officer’s 42 percent bilateral hearing impairment was directly linked to the December 2001 incident.

The Justice Hari Shankar-led Bench noted that multiple medical evaluations, including those from AIIMS and BSF medical boards, had persistently associated his disability with the injury sustained during service.

Ashvini Kumar Sharma, who remained in the BSF until his retirement in 2018, had requested disability compensation under the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939. His claim, however, was rejected by the Staff Court of Inquiry (SCOI) on the grounds of being filed too late.

The BSF argued that, according to Rule 6(i)6 of the CCS (EOP) Rules, since the injury occurred more than five years before his application, he was ineligible for disability compensation.

In its ruling, the Delhi High Court deemed these rejections untenable.

"The way the petitioner’s claim has been handled raises serious concerns. We cannot fathom why this war veteran, who suffered 42 percent hearing loss due to an injury sustained in 2001, had to wait 24 years for his rightful benefits," the bench remarked.

"The petitioner should not have to plead for his entitlements under the Rules; it was the responsibility of the authorities to release his dues upon realizing that he indeed suffered a disability from a service-related injury in 2001," it added.

The Delhi High Court ordered the Union government and BSF to provide disability compensation, calculate arrears from the date of the suitability certificate with 9 percent per annum interest, and ensure the payment is made within two weeks. "Considering the distress the petitioner has endured due to the injury incurred in 2001, we would have considered imposing punitive costs. However, we have opted to award interest on the disability compensation granted, thus refraining from further punitive measures," the bench concluded.