Ram Singh vs Union Of India & Ors.

Court
Delhi High Court

$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
% Date of Decision: 9 October, 2026
# CNR No. DLHC010424342026
+ W.P.(C) 13100/2026
RAM SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhay Kumar Bhargava, Mr.
Ajinkya Dhalwade and Mr. Nikhil Kumar,
Advocates.

versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Vedansh Anand, SPC with Mr.
Shivam Kumar and Mr. Kush Garg, Advocates for
UOI.
Mr. Niraj Kumar, SCGC with Mr. Chaitanya
Kumar, Advocate for UOI.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER PAL SINGH
JUDGEMENT
JYOTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)
CM APPL. 60894/2026
1. This application is filed on behalf of the Petitioner seeking permission
to file lengthy synopsis and list of dates on record.
2. Application is allowed and disposed of. Synopsis and list of dates are
taken on record.
W.P.(C) 13100/2026
3. This writ petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Article 226
of the Constitution of India seeking ex-gratia compensation under Office
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KAMAL KUMAR
Signing Date:23.10.2026
17:56:23
W.P.(C) 13100/2026 Page 1 of 6

Memorandums (OMs) dated 21.04.2011 and 07.06.2017 issued by Ministry
of Home Affairs, Government of India/Respondent No.1.
4. As stated in the petition, case of the Petitioner is that Petitioner was
appointed as Head Constable (GD) in BSF after being declared completely
medically fit in all respects upon clearing the Detailed Medical Examination
and had no pre-existing disease or disability. While serving in BSF,
Petitioner suffered ‘Bipolar Affective Disorder’ and Medical Board opined
on 07.03.2024 that the percentage of the disability was 35% and the
disability was aggravated by stress and strain of service. On 11.04.2024,
show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner under Rule 25 of BSF Rules,
1969 (1969 Rules) informing the Petitioner that the Medical Board had
found him suffering from ‘Bipolar Affective Disorder’ and he was placed in
medical category S5H1A1P1E1 and therefore, Petitioner was unfit for
further service in BSF and calling upon him to reply to the notice. By order
dated 25.05.2024, Petitioner was invalidated from service on ground of
physical unfitness with all pensionary benefits as admissible.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Petitioner is entitled
for ex-gratia compensation in light of the opinion of the Medical Board
diagnosing the Petitioner as a case of ‘Bipolar Affective Disorder’ and
assessing the disability at 35%, basis which Petitioner was
invalidated from service. It is urged that having accepted the Medical
Board opinion, it was not open to the Respondents to deny the ex-gratia
payment in terms of OMs dated 21.04.2011 and 07.06.2017 as also that case
of the Petitioner is covered by the judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court in Kalu Ram v. Union of India and Others, 2025 SCC OnLine Del
9748.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KAMAL KUMAR
Signing Date:23.10.2026
17:56:23
W.P.(C) 13100/2026 Page 2 of 6

6. Learned counsel for the Respondents fairly and candidly does not
dispute that the case of the Petitioner is covered by the OMs as also the
judgment in Kalu Ram (supra).
7. In the instant case, Petitioner was appointed in BSF in 2005 as Head
Constable (GD) after he was declared medically fit in all respects. While
serving, Petitioner was diagnosed with ‘Bipolar Affective Disorder’ vide
Medical Board’s opinion dated 07.03.2024 and the disability was assessed
as permanent and 35%. Show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner on
11.04.2024, calling upon him to show cause why he should not be
invalidated from the service on ground of medical unfitness and finally, vide
order dated 25.05.2024, Petitioner was invalidated from BSF
service.
8. Significantly, the Medical Board found that the disability was
contracted in service and aggravated due to stress and strain of service albeit
not attributable to conditions of service. The opinion has been admittedly
accepted by the Respondents as this forms the basis of Petitioner’s
invalidation from service and therefore, Respondents can neither dispute the
disability or its percentage nor the fact that it was aggravated due to stress
and strain of BSF service. For ready reference, opinion of the Medical Board
is as follows:-
“ PART-II OF MEDICAL BOARD PROCEEDINGS
050092060 Rank HC/RO Name Ram Singh Unit 87 Bn BSF
Finding by the Board in brief (if different from the findings mentioned in
part -1): attached
OPINION OF THE BOARD :-
The Board having examined No. 050092060 Rank HC/RO Name Ram
Singh Unit 87 Bn BSF is of the opinion that he is suffering from "Bipolar
Affective Disorder” and is considered UNFIT for further service in BSF.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KAMAL KUMAR
Signing Date:23.10.2026
17:56:23
W.P.(C) 13100/2026 Page 3 of 6

PLACE -CH BSF JALANDHAR PUNJAB
DATE - 07/03/2024”

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KAMAL KUMAR
Signing Date:23.10.2026
17:56:23
W.P.(C) 13100/2026 Page 4 of 6

9. Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India issued OM dated
21.04.2011 which stipulated that CAPFs personnel, who are disabled in the
performance of their bona fide official duties under various circumstances
and are boarded out from service on account of disability attributable to or
aggravated in service, shall be paid ex-gratia compensation amounting to
Rs.9 lakhs for 100% disability and for cases with lesser percentage, the
amount may be reduced in proportion to the degree of disability. By OM
dated 07.06.2017, the amount of compensation of Rs. 9 lakhs was revised to
Rs.20 lakhs with effect from 01.01.2016 for 100% disability on the basis of
th
7 CPC recommendations and for cases for lesser disability the amount of
compensation was reduced in proportion to the degree of disability. In Kalu
Ram (supra), placing reliance on the two OMs as also the opinion of the
Release Medical Board which diagnosed the disability of the Petitioner as
Severe Depressive Disorder with Psychotic Symptoms and assessed the
same at 40% permanent, the Division Bench held that Petitioner was entitled
to ex-gratia compensation and observed that despite the opinion of the
Medical Board being in favor of the Petitioner, he was unnecessarily made
to litigate. In this context, we may allude to the judgment of another
Division Bench in Hari Prakash v. Union of India and Others, 2026 SCC
OnLine Del 2256.
10. We are of the considered view that Petitioner is entitled to ex-gratia
compensation in terms of OMs dated 21.04.2011 and 07.06.2017, in light of
the opinion of the Medical Board diagnosing his disability as ‘Bipolar
Affective Disorder’, basis which he was invalidated out and the finding that
the disability was aggravated by stress and strain of service. Case of the
Petitioner is squarely covered by the judgments in Kalu Ram (supra) and
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KAMAL KUMAR
Signing Date:23.10.2026
17:56:23
W.P.(C) 13100/2026 Page 5 of 6

Hari Prakash (supra).
11. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed, directing Respondents No.2
and 3 to disburse the ex-gratia compensation to the Petitioner in terms of
OMs dated 21.04.2011 and 07.06.2017 within eight weeks from today,
failing which the amount shall carry interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of
discharge till date of actual payment.
12. Writ petition stands disposed of.


JYOTI SINGH, J


GURVINDER PAL SINGH, J
OCTOBER 9, 2026/YA
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KAMAL KUMAR
Signing Date:23.10.2026
17:56:23
W.P.(C) 13100/2026 Page 6 of 6