GURNAM SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner served the Indian Army from 23.1.1969 to 23.9.1972. He was discharged from the Indian Army on medical grounds. He was given medical category 'EEE' at the time of discharge from the service. He was granted disability pension from 24.9.1972 to 20.8.1974 as would appear from extract of the entries from the Pass Book (Annexure P-2). After his disability pension was stopped, the petitioner is said to have made representation to the various authorities and he even served notices of demand for justice (Annexure P-3 and P-4) but without any success. The petitioner has pleaded that stoppage of the disability pension, which was paid to him upto 20.8.1974, is per se arbitrary and discriminatory. The petitioner has relied on Regulations 173, 183 and 186 of the Pension Regulations and has pleaded that after having granted him the benefit of disability pension, the respondents could not have withheld the payment of the disability pension. The petitioner has further pleaded that vide Annexure P-6, the benefit of the disability pension has been extended to the cases of those persons whose degree of disablement subsequently falls below 20 per cent and these instructions have been made applicable in respect of those who are in service on 1.1.1973 and in this manner a patent discrimination has been brought about amongst the ex-servicemen who are in receipt of disability pension as on 1.1.1973 and who became entitled to the grant of disability pension after 1.1.1973.

(2.) Argument of Shri Sehgal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, is that the petitioner was discharged from the Military service on the ground of permanent disability and, therefore, it was not open to the respondents to deny the disability pension to the petitioner after 20.8.1974. He also submitted that the classification sought to be made between those who retired prior to 1.1.1973 but were in receipt of the disability pension and those who are discharged from service after 1.1.1973 and will thereafter receive the disability pension, is wholly arbitrary and discriminatory Shri Sehgal argued that when the Government has taken a decision to continue to grant the benefit of the disability pension to those whose disability is less than 20 per cent, such benefit cannot be restricted to a particular class of persons.

(3.) No reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents and none has appeared to argue the case.