EX SEP HARI RAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short question is involved in this writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that petitioner joined Army on 6th July,1941 and he was discharged on account of demobilisation on 14th May, 1947. Thereafter the petitioner was again recruited in the Defence Security Force from 4th July, 1960 and he superannuated on 5th July, 1969. It was contended before us by Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner rendered in all 14 years 10 months and 15 days service and he is entitled for pension in terms of Rules 124 and 125 of Pension Regulations as well as the letter of the Army Head Quarter dated 10/16th February, 1976.

(2.) On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent has contended that the petition suffers from delay and laches as the petitioner has approached this Court after 30 years and in the army the record is destroyed after 25 years. In support of his contention, learned Counsel for the respondent has also cited a judgment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Hans Ram v. Union of India, 1995 (34) DRJ 393.

(3.) We have given our careful consideration to the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for both the parties. The argument of learned Counsel for the respondent that the records are not available and, therefore, the petitioner cannot be granted any pension, is not tenable in view of the long roll maintained by the Record Office of the respondent, which has been filed before us along with counter affidavit. From the perusal of the extracts from the long roll, which is at page 15 of the paper-book, against column No. 9 which deals with former service, two years 177 days have been mentioned, whereas in the next column, i.e. column No. 10 dealing with pension/gratuity, the following has been mentioned :