EX NAIK RUN SINGH Vs. COMMANDANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for directing the respondents to pay disability pension to the petitioner who was retired from service on medical ground.Brief facts of the case are that petitioner was enrolled with the respondent on 2.7.1966. The petitioner served the respondent for fourteen years and his work and conduct was found satisfactory. In the year 1979 during the course of employment, petitioner suffered injuries and was hospitalised for dislocation of left arm. After the medical treatment, to adjudge the suitability of the petitioner to continue in service, he was referred to the medical board. After examination, petitioner was given medical category 'C' In spite of category 'C', petitioner was continued to be assigned hard duties, he was due for promotion as Head Constable, but the promotion was withheld on the medical ground. Thereafter, medical board decided that petitioner had become medically unfit to continue in service, and as a result of which petitioner was retired from service on medical ground on 22.9.1980. The petitioner applied for alternate job to the respondent, but was not given. The petitioner has averred that a person retired on the ground of medical unsuitability is entitled to disability pension, if the person is not retained in service. In spite of fulfilling the conditions, i.e., medically unsuitable and not retained in service, petitioner has not been granted disability pension.

(2.) The respondents have filed written statement stating that writ petition has been filed after a delay of 16 years. Petitioner is not entitled to disability pension because he has been granted invalid pension @ Rs. 80/- per month. Petitioner has hot applied for re-employment or reinstatement in the year 1995. It is submitted that the petitioner is entitled to disability pension as the admissibility of disability pension is dependent upon following terms, which read as under :-

(3.) Replication has also been filed to the written statement filed by the respondents. Petitioner has made an averment that he had applied for employment, but was refused. It is averred that the petitioner is entitled to, disability pension.