EX Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 771 of 1988, 8284 of 1988 and 9461 of 1989. The petitioners in all the three cases suffered epilepsy fits and were discharged from the Army on account of low medical category. Their claim' for disability pension having been declined, they have approached this Court through the above mentioned three writ petitions.

(2.) For facility of reference, the facts as stated in C.W.P. No. 771 of 1988 may be noticed. The admitted position is that the petitioner was appointed as Lance Naik on Sept. 1, 1963. He was promoted to the rank of Naik on Aug. 1, 1965 and Havildar on Dec. 3, 1967. The petitioner remained in medical category 'AYE' upto April, 1970. While posted at Pachmari (M.P.) the petitioner was admitted to Military Hospital on May 1, 1970. He was transferred to Military Hospital, Jabalpur on May 2, 1970 for investigation of epileptic fits. He was found to have developed clonic convulsive seizures. He was recommended to be invalidated out from service in medical category 'EEE' by the Board held at Military Hospital, Jabalpur on June 22, 1970. The proceedings of the Board were approved by the competent authority on June 25, 1970. The petitioner was invalidated out from service on Sept. 12, 1970 after having been found medically unfit for further military service. His claim for disability pension was initiated but was finally declined on the ground that the disability was not attributable to military service. The decision of the Controller Defence Accounts was conveyed to the petitioner vide letter dated Oct. 12, 1970, a copy of which has been produced on record as Annexure P-1. His subsequent representations to the various authorities having borne no fruit, and the claim having been finally declined vide orders dated Oct. 17, 1987 and Nov. 26, 1987 (Annexures P-14 and P-15), the petitioner has approached this Court through the present writ petition.

(3.) Mr. B.S. Sehgal, counsel for the petitioner has contended that para 423 of the Regulations for the Medical Services of Armed Forces, 1962, inter alia, provides for the manner in which the question of attributability to service has to be determined. Relying on clause (c) thereof, the learned counsel submits that the disability is deemed to have arisen in service if no note of it was made at the time when the petitioner joined the military service. Maj. S.K. Aggarwal, who has appeared for the respondents controverts the above stand of the petitioner.