EX SUBEDAR JASMAIL SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short issue raised in the instant petition is whether the Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) (for brevity, 'the CCDA') could sit in judgment over the opinion of the experts in medical line. The petitioner was boarded out from the army service on 31.7.1996. The Medical Board held on 27.12.1995 at Military Hospital, Ambala Cantt. found the petitioner suffering from 'Primary Hypertension'. His medical disability was certified to be 20%. Accordingly, the service element of the pension of the petitioner was released to him but the element of pension claim was rejected on 7.2.1997 on the basis of letter of the CCDA, dated 13.1.1997. He filed C.W.P. No. 14044 of 1998, which was decided on 5.12.2000.

(2.) According to the opinion expressed by this Court the disability suffered by the petitioner is 20% which is attributable to the army service. The petitioner was held entitled to the benefit of disability pension w.e.f. 1.8.1996. This Court has issued direction to the respondents to release the benefit of disability pension to the petitioner by fixing the period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of that order failing which the petitioner was also held entitled to interest @ 12% p.a. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Resurvey Medical Board as and when called upon by the respondent authorities. On 26.7.2001, the petitioner was called upon to appear before the Resurvey Medical Board, which was to be held at Military Hospital, Amritsar, to assess his disability. The Resurvey Medical Board assessed the combined disability of 50% (10% disability due to natural progress and 40% referable to service). The medical report has been attached by the respondents as Annexure R-1.

(3.) Therefore, it has been categorically established that the petitioner has been certified by the Resurvey Medical Board to be suffering from 40% disability for life. However, the CCDA without accepting the medical report of Resurvey Medical Board (R-1) has continued to assess the petitioner for 20% disability as is evident from the order dated 20.10.2001 (P-5). The aforementioned order is subject matter of challenge in the instant petition and further directions have been sought by the petitioner to grant him disability pension by assessing disability to the extent of 50% for life.