PRATAP SINGH PUNDIR Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of the case are that the Petitioner appears to have been recruited by the Respondents after passing the relevant Medical Examination. Thereafter, on his joining the Training Centre, it was found that he was suffering from Bilateral Cubitus Valgus. A Medical Examination was carried out at Landsdawn. He was also subjected to specialized medical tests at the Military Hospital Roorkee and Military Hospital Dehrudun. The Senior Advisory Surgeon at Military Hospital, Dehrudun examined the case of the Petitioner and opined that the Petitioner, who was 21 years of age at that time, was detected to have Bilateral Cubitus Valgus and, therefore, advised that he was unfit for service. It was also opined that the Petitioner was likely to develop problems during his early training, hence, the Petitioner was unfit.

(2.) Learned counsel for the Petitioner has placed reliance on the DSR Regulations for the Army 1987 Edition with special emphasis on Clause (d) which reads as follows:-

(3.) Reliance has also been placed on Regulation 428 which states that -?As a general rule men should not be invalided for defects which were present on enlistment.? Learned counsel for the Petitioner has further emphasized the fact that the Petitioner has not been granted any Disability Pension.