UNION OF INDIA (UOI) REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE AND THE GARISSON ENGINEER Vs. EX SUBEDAR HARBHAJAN SINGH S/O GULZARA SINGH SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS (GLAN KAUR W/O LATE HARBHAJAN SINGH AND OTHERS)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE correctness of the order of the learned single Judge dated 14/10/2004 allowing W.P. No. 23147/1999 and directing to settle the pensionary benefits of deceased respondent, is questioned in this appeal urging various grounds and praying to set aside the same.

(2.) THE contention urged by the learned Counsel for the appellants is that the relief granted in the writ petition is on the basis of the decision of this Court in W.A. No. 2655/1995 wherein the Apex Court decision in Major Radhakrishnan's case is relied upon, which is no longer good law in view of the subsequent decision reported in Union of India and Others Vs. Harjeet Singh Sandhu etc., AIR 2001 SC 1772 . Therefore, learned Counsel for the appellants has requested this Court to allow this appeal and dismiss the writ petition. Learned Counsel for the appellants placed reliance upon Section 20(1) of Army Act and Rule 17 of the Army Rules.

(3.) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the parties and after perusing the records, we proceed to examine the case on merits. It is an undisputed fact that the order of dismissal of Ex.Subedar Harbhajan Singh from service is passed under Section 20(1) of the Army Act read with Rule 17 of Army Rules. The dismissed officer is no more. His wife and children are fighting this legal battle for service benefits. The cause of dismissal is "services no longer required", which is evident from Annexure -J dated 27 -8 -1990. But, in the order of dismissal dated 17 -8 -1990 produced as Annexure -J1, no reason is assigned. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder: In exercise of the powers conferred by the Army Act Section 20(1) read in conjunction with Army Rule 17, I direct that JC81489 Sub HB Singh of GE(P) (I) East, Bangalor, attached to 152 AD Regt be dismissed from service. In the show cause notice at Annexure -E, certain allegations are made against the dismissed officer. It is thus clear that the dismissal order though not contain any reason, as per the communication at Annexure -J it was passed not on the allegations contained in the show cause notice as the reason assigned is "services no longer required". For all these reasons, the order dismissing the officer from service is vitiated and bad in law and the learned single Judge is justified in quashing the same.