In a landmark judgment, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that family pension rules must be interpreted in a liberal and inclusive manner for disabled dependents. The Court emphasized that rigid or narrow readings of these rules would result in injustice to those most in need of social protection.
“The provisions governing the grant of family pension to a disabled person cannot be interpreted in a narrow sense, so as to exclude genuine claims,”
— Justice Sanjay Dhar
This ruling came in response to a petition filed by Smt. Balbir Kour, a severely disabled woman from Budgam, Kashmir. Her father, Shri Joginder Singh, was a retired Army man who later worked as a security guard for State Bank of India (SBI) from 1971 until his retirement in 1994. He passed away in 2010. Balbir Kour, who is 100% disabled due to a congenital disease, had applied for family pension as a dependent.
Her application was denied by SBI, despite her disability being recognized by Army authorities, who had already approved her for family pension on their side. The Bank cited technical grounds such as her age being over 25, her name not appearing in the pension records, and the timing of her disability becoming "visible" only in 2009 when she underwent below-knee amputation.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Slams Abuse of Writ Jurisdiction for Fraudulent GST Claims; ₹1 Lakh Cost Imposed
However, the Court rejected these arguments and found that her disability had existed since birth, even if it became more visible later.
“The fact that the petitioner was suffering from incurable congenital disease... clearly goes on to show that the disability had manifested itself... right from the day of her birth,”
— Justice Sanjay Dhar
The Court held that her condition qualifies under SBI’s own pension rules, which allow lifelong pension to a child who is "physically crippled or disabled... if the disability manifests before the retirement or death of the employee." The Court interpreted the word “manifests” broadly to include congenital conditions, even if the severity increases over time.
Read Also:- CJI Sanjiv Khanna Emphasizes: "Public Trust in Judiciary Must Be Earned, Not Commanded"
“Merely because the effects of the congenital disease were less pronounced during the initial years... would not disentitle such person to get the family pension,”
— High Court Observation
Justice Dhar noted that the main aim of pension schemes is to provide social security and financial help to people who are unable to earn due to their physical condition. He stressed that rules related to disabled dependents must be understood in a compassionate and practical way.
Read Also:- Centre Withdraws Blocking of '4PM News' YouTube Channel, Supreme Court Informed
SBI also argued that Balbir Kour had filed the petition with delay. However, the Court dismissed this claim, noting that the petitioner had first approached the court in 2011, soon after her father’s death. The impugned rejection letter came in 2020, and the present petition was filed in 2023.
“We have to take into account the fact that the petitioner is a crippled person who depends completely upon others... It would not have been possible for the petitioner to consult a lawyer immediately,”
— Justice Sanjay Dhar
In conclusion, the High Court quashed SBI’s rejection letter and directed the Bank to process and approve her family pension claim within two months.
“The impugned communication dated 23.04.2020 is quashed. The respondents are directed to process the Family Pension case of the petitioner... within a period of two months.”
— High Court Order
Case Title: Smt. Balbir Kour Vs State Bank Of India
