J JONAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the petitioner-in-person and Mr. R. Santhanam for the respondents.

(2.) THE present writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Central administrative Tribunal in O. A. No. 1430 of 2000 dated 17. 8. 2001. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to the respondents to award pension including workmen's compensation as per the CCS (P) Rule Appendix 4: 9th para (as amended) with effect from 15. 12. 1987 as per the letter dated 20. 7. 1992 with D. C. R. G. and c. G. E. G. I. S. amount of Rs. 20,000 with 24 per cent interest per annum and issue the dues as per the promised letter No. C. V. R. D. E. /pc/480/lb dated 3. 7. 1992.

(3.) THE petitioner was appointed as a machinist on 3. 10. 1979 in the office of the combat Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (hereinafter referred to as 'cvrde' in short ). In course of time, he was upgraded as Trademan-C with effect from 30. 10. 1984 and worked as such in CVRDE till 14. 12. 1987. While he was working, on 28. 10. 1986, a small chip fell in his right eye and he was treated in different hospitals and, ultimately in August 1987, he was called for medical check-up at Government Ophthalmic Hospital, where he was certified to be completely and permanently incapacitated for further service. Accordingly, his services were terminated on 15. 12. 1987. Petitioner being admittedly an industrial worker coming within the scope of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 had applied for compensation and a letter was sent to the hospital to intimate the percentage of loss and the exact reason for the disability. At that stage, the Medical board had opined that the petitioner was not eligible for any compensation as there was no damage to the eyes due 'to injuries sustained during work'. The petitioner had been paid the gratuity for the period of service of 9 years and odd. Thereafter, the petitioner and his wife had jointly filed o. A. No. 563 of 1993 directing the respondents to sanction invalid pension under rule 38 of CCS Pension Rules or payment of any other pension and also to settle dcrg, Central Government Employees' group Insurance Scheme and pension arrears. The said application was dismissed on 1. 11. 1993 on the ground that the petitioner was not eligible for pension as he had not completed 10 years of service. O. A. No. 489 of 1993, which had been filed for directing the respondents to give compassionate appointment to his wife in group-C post, was separately disposed of by the Tribunal by giving a direction to the effect that necessary representation may be made in the prescribed format which could be considered by the authorities. However, since other particulars and required documents were not furnished, it seems that the matter remained like that. The petitioner had filed Civil Appeal No. 7155 of 1996 against the order dated 1. 11. 1993 in O. A. No. 563 of 1993 praying for payment of pension in accordance with rule 38. The supreme Court disposed of the said appeal with the following order: