Authorities must decide pending disability pension appeals through reasoned orders considering statutory protections for disabled employees.

The applicant, a former employee of the Indian Air Force, was denied disability pension via a communication dated September 23, 2024

The authorities determined that his disabilities—"Other Mental Disorder Due to Brain Damage and Dysfunction" and "Intentional Self-Harm by Hanging"—were neither attributable to nor aggravated by Air Force service

The applicant filed an appeal against this rejection on September 24, 2024, before the Directorate of Air Veterans, which remained pending without consideration

Consequently, the applicant approached the Tribunal seeking to quash the rejection and obtain a direction for the sanction of disability pension, citing the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPWD) Act, 2016, and the CCS (Pension) Rules

1. Whether the respondent authority is obligated to consider and decide upon the applicant's pending statutory appeal regarding the rejection of disability pension

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to disability pension benefits in light of the RPWD Act, 2016, and the Supreme Court's precedent in Kunal Singh v. UOI & Anr.

The Tribunal exercised its jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

The court referenced the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPWD) Act, 2016, and the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1962

The Tribunal relied on the legal principles established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kunal Singh v. UOI & Anr., which addresses the protection against discrimination and the right to benefits for employees who acquire disabilities during service

The Tribunal noted that despite proper service of notice, the respondents failed to appear in the proceedings

Rather than adjudicating on the merits of the disability's attributability, the Tribunal focused on the administrative delay in processing the applicant's appeal

The Member observed that an "innocuous prayer" had been made to simply have the pending appeal considered

The Tribunal determined that the ends of justice would be served by directing the competent authority to dispose of the appeal in a time-bound manner, specifically instructing them to apply the ratio of the Kunal Singh judgment and the provisions of the RPWD Act to the facts of the applicant's case

The Tribunal explicitly clarified that it did not delve into the merits of the claim, leaving all points open for the respondent's consideration

The authority was ordered to treat the O.A. as part of the appeal and issue a reasoned and speaking order in light of Kunal Singh v. UOI & Anr. within 60 days of receiving the order

The applicant was further directed to provide a copy of the cited Supreme Court judgment to the respondents to facilitate the decision

No costs were awarded