CWP No.16801 of 2006 :1 :
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
Date of decision: 09.10.2009.
Karam Chand, Ex.LNK ... Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI
Present: Mr.KS Dadwal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.Heman Aggarwal, Advocate,for Union of India.
PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral):
The petitioner was enrolled on 19.01.1966 in 17 Dogra
Regiment. After completion of 24 years of service with exemplary
character, he was discharged from service on 31.01.1990. In view of
the exemplary character and fitness, the petitioner was enrolled in
Defence Security Corps on 8.9.1990 on being found medically fit. Due
to rigorous fatigues and hard work, he suffered disease of Early Artoic
Valve Scissors and Cardiac Dysrhythamla and then IGT, he was placed
in BEE (Permanent) medical category. The petitioner acquired
aforesaid disease due to night duties and long standing and alterness in
Field Stations. He fell ill and remained admitted at MH Ashvini,
Bombay, Pune, MH Delhi and thereafter in the MH Jalandhar Cantt.
with effect from 18.3.1999 to 3.11.2000. Because of the Low Medical
Category BEE (Permanent), the petitioner was discharged from service
CWP No.16801 of 2006 :2 :
on medical grounds on 30.1.2001 after completion of 11 years and 83
days of service. Vide order dated 26.5.2003 (Annexure P-1) the case of
the petitioner was sent for disability pension. The claim of the
petitioner was rejected vide order dated 29.10.2003 (Annexure P-2) on
the ground that the disability suffered by the petitioner neither
attributable nor aggravated by military service. The order Annexure P-
2 was challenged by filing an Appeal on 19.02.2004 (Annexure P-3)
before the Secretary to Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence, New
Delhi, which was rejected by a non-speaking order on 19.05.2005
(Annexure P-4) by just mentioning that the petitioner is not entitled to
disability pension as per Regulation 173 of the Pension Regulations
for Army Part-1, 1961. Order Annexure P-5 was further challenged in
representation/appeal before the Defence Minister's Appellate
Committee on Pensions, Government of India, Ministry of Defence,
New Delhi, which was also rejected on 23.06.2006 (Annexure P-6)
without stating any reasons. It is under these circumstances, the
petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking disability pension
for the second spell of service.
It is agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties that the
controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by a
decision of this Court rendered in the case of Ex-CFN Jai Vir Singh Vs.
Union of India and others (CWP No.5931 of 1995) on 01.09.2000,
wherein the following directions/observations have been made:-
CWP No.16801 of 2006 :3 :
"9. In this respect, Rule 14 of the Entitlement
Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982
which has a direct bearing on the case reads as
under:-
14 (a) ....
(b) A disease which has led to an
individual's discharge or death will ordinarily
be deemed to have arisen in service, if no note
of it was made at the time of individual's
acceptance for military service. However, if
medical opinion holds, for reasons to be stated,
that the disease could not have been detected on
medial examination prior to acceptance for
service, the disease will not be deemed to have
arisen during service.
..................
In the light of the above discussion, the
writ petition is allowed. The decision of the
respondents contained in Annexure P-2
rejecting the petitioner’s claim for disability
pension is quashed and it is held that the
petitioner is entitled to get disability pension in
accordance with relevant rules. The
CWP No.16801 of 2006 :4 :
respondents are directed to calculate the
disability pension payable to the petitioner from
the date the pension fell due and pay the same
within three months of the receipt of a certified
copy of this order else the petitioner shall get
interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the
date of expiry of three months mentioned above
till the date of actual payment. The respondents
must thereafter continue to pay disability
pension on every succeeding month.”
The above observations/directions are fully applicable in the
facts and circumstances of the present case. The petitioner is entitled to the
relief of disability pension for the second spell of service as claimed in the
writ petition. However, arrears are restricted to three years prior to the
filing of the writ petition.
Petitions stands allowed.
09.10.2009 (PERMOD KOHLI) BLS JUDGE
