JUDGMENT : 1. This is a petition by a Constable who was boarded out from the services of Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force (for short „Force?) on medical grounds after he had served the force for 13 years and 4 months. He was sanctioned invalid pension, but was not paid disability pension which the petitioner claims is payable to him in terms of the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules (for short ‘Rules’). 2. The case set up by the petitioner in this petition is that he was enrolled in the force on 01.01.1991 after he was found fit on all respects. He was, however, discharged from the Force on 03.04.2004 on medical grounds. It is claimed that the petitioner at the time of his recruitment in the force and few years thereafter remained hale and hearty, but, later on, fell sick due to stress and strain of the duty. He was examined by the Medical Board and was diagnosed as a patient of “Psychoneurosis (Bipolar Affective Disorder) Manic Depressive Psychosis with Alcohol abuse”. In the light of the opinion of the Medical Board, the petitioner was served with show cause notice and was eventually discharged from the force w.e.f 03.04.04 on the ground that due to the ailment which the petitioner was suffering from, he was not fit to perform his duty. The petitioner claims to have served the force for more than 13 years. The respondents did sanction in his favour invalid pension to the tune of Rs.1,913/-w.e.f. 01.05.04, but had declined to grant him the disability pension as provided under the Rules. This, in nutshell, is the grievance projected by the petitioner in this petition. 3. The respondents have filed their objections and have taken a stand that the petitioner was discharged from the service on medical grounds and because of the petitioner?s suffering from Psychoneurosis (Bipolar Affective Disorder) Manic Depressive Psychosis with Alcohol abuse”, which, disease, as per the opinion of the Medical Board, was neither attributable or aggravated by the service conditions. It is, thus, submitted that the petitioner was only found entitled to invalid pension which was sanctioned in his favour vide Sanction Order dated 18th August 2004. 4. It is, thus, submitted that the petitioner was only found entitled to invalid pension which was sanctioned in his favour vide Sanction Order dated 18th August 2004. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I find that the plea taken by the respondents, that the disease which the petitioner was suffering from and which resulted in discharge of the petitioner on medical grounds was not attributable or aggravated by the service conditions, is devoid of any merit. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner, at the time of his enrolment, was not suffering from any disease, at least none was detected. He was found fit to serve as Constable/Cook in the Force. He remained hale and hearty for quite some time and thereafter suffered from the disease Psychosis and Psychoneurosis as certified by the Medical Board. The petitioner was subjected to medical examination by the Specialist in psychiatry who rendered his opinion with regard to the ailment the petitioner was suffering from. In ITBP form 223-B, the Specialist aforesaid while replying to paragraph (c) has said no to the question as to whether the disease was attributable and aggravated by the service conditions. He, however, has not given any reason as to how and why the disease suffered by the petitioner was not attributable and aggravated by the service conditions. Apart from the aforesaid format, there is a detailed note written by the Specialist in Psychiatry aforesaid namely Dr. N.K. Yudhuvanshi indicating elaborately the medical condition of the petitioner, but nowhere in the aforesaid note also, it has been opined that the disease which the petitioner was suffering from was constitutional in nature and was not attributable and aggravated by the service conditions. The Medical Board, which placed the petitioner in low medial category S5 H1A1P1E1 (SHAPE-5) i.e EEEe and declared him unfit for further service of any kind in the Force, also did not give its opinion as to whether or not the ailment which the petitioner was suffering from was attributable or aggravated by the service conditions. The Medical Board simply endorsed the opinion of the Psychiatrist Dr. N.K Yadhuvanshi given by him on 23.2.2004. 6. The Medical Board simply endorsed the opinion of the Psychiatrist Dr. N.K Yadhuvanshi given by him on 23.2.2004. 6. In view of the fact that there is no specific opinion by the medical expert as to whether the ailment which the petitioner was suffering from was on account of disease attributable and aggravated by the service conditions or not, it would be appropriate to fall back upon the provisions of the Rules (supra). 7. It is not in dispute before this Court that the disability pension of an employee of Force is regulated by the Rules. 8. Rule 3(4) defines the disease as under: “disease” means- a disease as is mentioned in Schedule 1-A hereto annexed”. 9. Schedule 1-A provides list and classification of diseases which can be contracted by service. Entry-B of Schedule 1-A provides that Psychosis and Psychoneurosis are the diseases affected by stress and strain. It would be appropriate to reproduce the relevant extract of Schedule 1-A which is as under: “I. List and classification of diseases which can be contracted by service. A. Diseases affected by climatic conditions. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx B. Diseases affected by stress and strain (i) Psychosis and Psychoneurosis. (ii) Hyperpiesia. (iii) Hypertension(BP) (iv) Pulmonary Tuberculosis. (v) Pulmonary Tuberculosis with pleural effusion. (vi) Tuberculosis-Non pulmonary. (vii) Mitral Stenosis. (viii) Pericarditis and adherent pericardium (ix) Endo carditis. (x) Sub acute bacterialendo carditis, including infective endocarditis. (xi) Nyocarditis-acute or chronis. (xii) Valvular disease. C. Diseases affected by dietary compulsions. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx D. Diseases affected by training, marching etc. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx E. Environmental Diseases. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx” 10 Rules 3-A lays down the eligibility for disability pension which is also reproduced hereunder for ready reference: “3-A. Eligibility (1) (a) Disablement shall be accepted as due to Government service, provided that it is certified that it is due to wound, injury or disease which - (i) is attributable to Government service, or (ii) existed before or arose during Government service and has been and remains aggravated thereby. (b) Death shall be accepted as due to Government service provided it is certified that it was due to or hastened by - (i) a wound, injury or disease which was attributable to Government service, or (ii) the aggravation by Government service of a wound, injury or disease which existed before or arose during Government service. (b) Death shall be accepted as due to Government service provided it is certified that it was due to or hastened by - (i) a wound, injury or disease which was attributable to Government service, or (ii) the aggravation by Government service of a wound, injury or disease which existed before or arose during Government service. (2) There shall be a causal connection between – (a) disablement and Government service ; and (b) death and Government service, for attributability or aggravation to be conceded. Guidelines in this regard are given in the Appendix, which shall be treated as part and parcel of these Rules. 11. From the reading of Rule 3-A of the Rules, it is clear that disablement would be accepted as due to Government Service, if it is certified that it is due to a disease attributable to Government service or existed before or arising during Government service and has been and remains aggravated thereby. The last paragraph of Rule 3-A reproduced above further provides that for attributability or aggravation, to be conceded, the guidelines given in the appendix shall be treated as part and parcel of the Rules. 12. It is trite that ordinarily the opinion of the Medical Board should be given due weight- age and primacy in the matter of ascertaining as to whether or not the disease suffered by an employee is due to or was aggravated by the service conditions. However, if the opinion given by the Medical Board is vague and does not indicate with certainty as to whether the disease suffered by an employee, boarded out on medical ground is due to or is aggravated by the service conditions, there is no option, but to fall back upon on the relevant pension Rules. The very fact that no such disease was detected when the petitioner was enrolled as Constable/Cook in the force and was rather found medically fit, would go a long way to demonstrate that the disease which the petitioner suffered from was contracted by him during his service. This is more so, because there is no contrary medical opinion that the disease which the petitioner was suffering was genetic or constitutional in nature and was not capable of being aggravated by the service conditions. 13. This is more so, because there is no contrary medical opinion that the disease which the petitioner was suffering was genetic or constitutional in nature and was not capable of being aggravated by the service conditions. 13. I have reproduced the relevant extract of the Rules and on perusal find that the Government has recognized that the disease namely “Psychosis and Psychoneurosis” is one which is affected by stress and strain. In the absence of any expert opinion to the contrary, this Court has no option but to believe that the disease suffered by the petitioner was contracted by him during the service on account of stress sand strain of the service conditions or was aggravated by such service conditions. I am aware that the petitioner was serving as a Cook and the services he rendered in the Force may not be at par with the regular constables, yet it cannot be said that a cook in the Combat Force is free from stress and strain. He is supposed to move with the Unit from one place to another and ensure that a good and hygienic food is made available to the members of the Force. He is subject to same discipline as is required to be maintained by the other members of the Force. I am, therefore, not persuaded to concede to the submissions made by learned ASGI appearing for the respondents that the petitioner being a cook in the Force was not subjected to any stress and strain of service. The petitioner has served the Force for more than 13 years and was shown the door not on account of any misconduct on his part, but on medical ground. The respondents cannot turn their back and leave the petitioner to sustain on the meager amount of invalid pension i.e Rs. 1,913/-. 14. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition of the petitioner is allowed and a direction is issued to the respondents to sanction and grant disability pension in favour of the petitioner in terms the Rules (supra) w.e.f the date he was discharged from service i.e 03.04.04 with all consequential benefits.