DAYA SHANKAR MISHRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant after passing M.B.B.S from G.R. Medical College, Gwalior, joined the Army Medical Corps on December 7, 1965 as an emergency commissioned officer under Army Notification No. AI/15/S of 1962. In the year 1968, the Government of India lifted the emergency but the appellant was continued in service. THE appellant is stated to have requested the respondents for release from the Army as he was allegedly granted admission in the subject of E.N.T. in the J.R. Medical College, Gwalior. THE second respondent, the Director, Medical Services, Army Corps, Government of India, New Delhi, however, turned down the request of the appellant. Consequently, the appellant continued in service. After about serving for seventeen years, the appellant applied for grant of permanent commission. In 1982, a medical board was held in connection with the request of the appellant for grant of permanent commission. THE medical board found him to be fit and classified him in Shape I. Subsequently, the appellant is stated to have developed some dispute with his Commanding Officer Col. A.K. Sen, who allegedly had him admitted in the Military Hospital, Jallandhar, on November 15,1982 as a psychiatric patient. According to the appellant, he was kept in isolation for a period of nine months under heavy guard. THE appellant remained in the hospital until July 30, 1983. During the course of his stay in the hospital, on April 11, 1983 he was invalidated by a medical board. It is the case of the appellant that on April 19, 1983 he filed a petition to the Chief of the Army Staff through proper channel against the finding of the medical board. THEreafter he filed a statutory complaint on September 2, 1983 to the first respondent. THE appellant, however, was released from the Army on November 13, 1983. After his release from the Army, the Central Government rejected the aforesaid complaint on May 17, 1984. Subsequently, the appellant applied for grant of permanent invalid pension. Even this request was rejected by the Government of India on February 11, 1985. THE appellant thereupon filed an appeal to the Defence Minister's Appellate Committee on Pensions. On July 21, 1987, the appeal was rejected on the ground that the cause of invalidment was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. THE appellant being aggrieved by his release from the Army and rejection of his statutory complaint, filed a writ petition, being No. 250/85, before the Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. On June 26, 1992, the writ petition was rejected by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench, on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction of the High Court. THEreupon the appellant filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court against the order of the Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. THE said Special Leave Petition being S.L.P. No. 1069/92 came to be dismissed on February 1, 1993 as withdrawn. THE Supreme Court, however, gave liberty to the appellant to move the appropriate court. Utilising the liberty granted by the Supreme Court, the appellant filed a writ petition being Civil Writ Petition No. 1858/93 seeking a writ for declaring the order dated November 13, 1983 releasing the appellant from service illegal. Besides, the appellant claimed reinstatement in military service with all consequential benefits as he would have earned but for the release order. That apart, the appellant inter alia claimed pension at admissible rates as per the rules. THE learned Single Judge rejected the writ petition as according to the learned Single Judge the appellant had not made out any case for interference. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, the appellant has filed the instant Letters Patent Appeal. We have heard the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondents. It was urged by the appellant that the respondents failed to follow Rule 15A of the Army Rules, 1964 (for short 'the Rules') which has rendered the order of release dated September 13,1983 as nugatory. In order to appreciate the submission of the appellant we consider it appropriate to extract Rule 15A of the Army Rules. Rule 15 A reads as follows: -