UJAGAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was enrolled as a member of the Royal Indian Army on 8th Feb., 1943, was invalided out of the military service with 100% disability on 4th Aug., 1945. As a result of the disability, the petitioner was placed in permanent medical category EEE. The authorities concerned, upon consideration of the case of the petitioner and on the basis of medical report submitted by the Medical Board, granted disability pension at the rate of Rs. 45.00 per month to the petitioner which the petitioner continued to receive till 19th March, 1950 when suddenly the said pension was stopped by the respondents. The petitioner continued to persist his claim, as a result of which he was subjected to another Medical Board which assessed his disability at 40%. However, this decision of the Medical Board was not accepted by the Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) which reduced the disability of the petitioner to be less than 25% and consequently, the petitioner was denied pension on 23rd April, 1990. An appeal preferred by the petitioner against this order was dismissed by the Government of India vide order dated 27th March, 1992. The second appeal against this appellate order was filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Committee, with an application for condonation of delay. The petitioner served a legal notice through his counsel on 10th April, 1995. The Appellate Committee of the Ministry of Defence vide its order dated 6.2.1996 expressed the opinion that the petitioner was entitled to receive disability pension and it informed the concerned quarter of this opinion. The petitioner in normal course would be entitled to this pension, as per the opinion of the Appellate Committee, till 23rd April, 2000. However, the Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) did not act upon this opinion, thus, compelling the petitioner to file the present writ petition.

(2.) Upon notice, a reply was filed on behalf of the respondents. The facts with the regard to the discharge of the petitioner from the Army in the year 1945 and his entitlement for disability pension till 1950 is admitted. It is stated that the disability pension was stopped as the Accounts Branch considered the disability of the petitioner to be nil. It is not disputed that the Medical Board assessed the disability of the petitioner in the year 1990 at 20%. However, it is stated that the Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) rightly assessed the disability of the petitioner to be 6 to 10% on the basis of the medical papers submitted before it and consequently it was argued that the petitioner was not entitled to any disability pension.

(3.) From the above narrated facts and the stand taken by the parties before us, the controversy that falls for determination by us is a very narrow compass viz whether the Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) has any jurisdiction to sit over the opinion of the experts (Medical Board) while dealing with the case of grant of disability pension, in regard to the percentage of the disability pension, or not. In the present case, it is no where stated that the petitioner was subjected to any higher medical board before the Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) decided to decline the disability pension to the petitioner. We are unable to see as to how the accounts branch dealing with the pension can sit over the judgment of the experts in the medical line and comment upon the extent of disability without making any reference to a detailed or higher medical board which can be constituted under the relevant instructions and rules by the Director General of Army Medical Core.