Taking note of a soldier-like act of supreme sacrifice on the hostile Indo-China border more than two decades ago, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that General Reserve Engineering Force (GREF) personnel – performing duties of strategic and national importance in active border areas – are to be treated as members of the “armed forces of the Union” and not as ordinary workmen for the purpose of pensionary benefits.

Upholding the grant of extraordinary family pension to the widow of a Shaurya Chakra awardee, the Division Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor directed that arrears be released for a period of three years preceding the filing of the writ petition.

The Bench was dealing with cross appeals arising out of a claim by Kuldeep Kaur, whose husband Mohan Singh, an Overseer with GREF, lost his life on July 10, 2000, while supervising formation cutting work on a strategically crucial China Study Group (CSG) road in Arunachal Pradesh. The widow was represented by senior advocate Gurpreet Singh, along with counsel Ramandeep Kaur.

‘Act of devotion to duty in an emergency’

The court observed that Mohan Singh, posted in an active and treacherous border area, was overseeing dozer operations when a massive boulder rolled down from the hilltop. “Realising the danger, he immediately raised an alarm and instructed the dozar and compressor operators to move out to a safer place,” the Bench observed.

In an attempt to save his colleagues and essential equipment, he was swept away by the falling debris and plunged into a 70-metre-deep valley. “For the supreme sacrifice and exemplary courage shown by the petitioner’s husband, while serving the nation in the most difficult terrain, the Government of India awarded him ‘Shaurya Chakra’, posthumously,” the Bench asserted.

Rejecting the argument that GREF personnel were “workmen” covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, the court held that the nature of duties performed by Mohan Singh at the time of his death was determinative.

“Considering the services that the late husband of the petitioner was carrying out, at the time of his unfortunate death, the same would have to be construed as services of that of ‘a member of the armed forces’ and not of a ‘workman’,” the Bench ruled.

Acknowledging that GREF personnel were under dual control and governed by civil service rules for service conditions, the court asserted their role in hostile border areas could not be equated with routine construction activity by an ordinary employer.

Compensation under 1923 Act no bar

The Bench also rejected the argument that receipt of compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, barred the widow from claiming extraordinary pension under the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules.

The court held that the incident could not be termed a “simple accident”, it squarely fell within the provisions of the EOP Rules — “a mishap due to an act of devotion to duty in an emergency arising otherwise than by violence out of and in the course of service”.

Before parting with the judgment, the Bench dismissed the Union of India’s appeal, while the widow’s appeal was partly allowed, modifying the judgment to the limited extent of arrears for a period of three years preceding the filing of writ petition.