S S DHINGRA Vs. MINISTRY OF DEFENCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking disability pension from 31-12-1994 and is challenging the orders dated 13-5-1999, 20-6-1999 and the subsequent order dated 8-3-2001 passed by the Competent Authority, the First appellate Authority and Second Appellate Authority.

(2.) THE petitioner appeared in person and therefore, his pleadings in the matter are scattered in various rejoinders, applications, which are all on record. Similarly, the respondents also did not file any return and at the time of final hearing of the matter, the Counsel for the respondents made request to call for their submissions filed to oppose the admission. Thus submissions were, therefore, accordingly called. The respondents have also filed their replies to the rejoinders and applications of the petitioner from time to time. Thus, the pleadings of the parties are not compact in any one document and one has to peruse all these papers to ascertain the same. In view of this position, the review of how the parties have filed their pleadings on record needs to be taken.

(3.) THE petitioner has filed this petition on 22-1 -2001 and on 31 -3-2001 he filed additional affidavit with a copy of order dated 8-3-2001, communicating rejecting his Second/final Appeal. Thereafter on 22-6-2001, the respondents filed a submission with Medical Board proceedings and Rules titled as "entitlement Rules for Casualty Pension and Awards, 1982" (hereinafter referred to as "1982 Rules" ). The petitioner filed his first rejoinder to these submissions on 28-6-2001 and thereafter additional rejoinder on 21-7-2001. The matter was admitted on 9-7-2001 for urgent hearing. These two rejoinders filed by the petitioner were replied to by the respondents in their two replies filed on 11-10-2001. On 5-11-2001, the petitioner filed his counter to these replies of the respondents. On 10-12-2001, he filed his another counter in continuation of his first counter affidavit mentioned above. On 12-12-2001, he filed second counter affidavit in same process. Thereafter at the stage of final hearing, on 22-7-2004, the respondents have filed their affidavit on record and along with it produced the Medical Board papers of 1970. On 3-8-2004, the respondents have filed affidavit with copies of two Medical Board proceedings of the year 1982. On 6-8-2004, the petitioner filed his affidavit and on the same day, the respondents have filed their written notes of arguments along with appendix 2 which contains the different Entitlement Rules. These rules are again in relation to disability pension only but appear to be prior to 1982 in point of time. Hence, these Rules are referred to as "old Rules" in the body of this judgement.