LAWS(SC)-2019-9-77

SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Vs. DHARAMBIR SINGH

Decided On September 20, 2019
Secretary, Government Of India Appellant
V/S
DHARAMBIR SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present appeal is to an order dated March 7, 2011 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh, Regional Bench at Chandimandir, (for short, 'Tribunal') granting disability pension to the respondent Dharambir Singh, as the injury was found to be attributed to military service.

(2.) The undisputed facts are that the respondent joined Territorial Army on December 28, 1981 and was discharged on December 13, 1999. He was granted two days casual leave from January 25, 1999 to January 26, 1999 when posted at Jalandhar Cantt. During the leave period, he met with an accident while riding a scooter and suffered head injury with Faciomaxillary and compound fracture 1/3rd Femur (LT). A Court of Inquiry, (for short, 'COI') was conducted to investigate into the circumstances under which the respondent sustained injuries. The Brigade Commander has given its Report dated August 18, 1999 that the injuries, occurred in peace area, are attributable to military service. One of the findings of the Report recorded under Column 3(c) is reproduced hereunder:

(3.) After rendering pensionable service of 17 years and 225 days, the respondent was discharged from service on December 13, 1999 pursuant to the report of the Medical Board dated November 29, 1999 which held the disability to be 30%. However, the claim for disability pension was rejected by the Medical Board on the ground that the disability was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. An appeal filed by the respondent against the rejection of his claim for disability pension was rejected by the Additional Directorate General, Personnel Services. It is thereafter the respondent invoked the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal referred to the judgment of this Court in Madan Singh Shekhawat v. Union of India & Ors., 1999 6 SCC 459 and held that the respondent is entitled to disability pension.