JARNAIL SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHAT is the ambit and scope of expression "attributable to and aggravated by military service" appearing in para 173 of the Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961 is the precise question that falls for consideration before this Court, in the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that the petitioner was selected as Sepoy in the Indian Army on 8. 9. 1988 and consequently became subject to the provisions of the Indian Army Act and other rules and regulations. On 21. 4. 1991, the petitioner proceeded on casual leave and he was to return on 28. 4. 1991. Unfortunately, the right hand of. the petitioner was crushed at home when he was operating wheat thresher. This injury resulted in amputation of his right hand and consequent disability to the petitioner. The authorities concerned invalided the petitioner out of Army service on 30. 12. 1991. The petitioner raised a claim for grant of disability pension, which was declined by the respondents vide order dated 17. 9. 1992 (Annexure P-3 to the petition ). The petitioner preferred an appeal against this order on 4. 12. 1992, but the same was rejected by the respondents on 17. 5. 1994 resulting in filing of the present petition.

(3.) THE provisions of law which have a bearing on the matter in issue in that writ petition are Paras 173 and 175 of the Pension Regulation for the Army, 1961. Rule 2 of Appendix II and Para 13 of Entitlement Rules to Casuality -Pensionary Awards to the Armed Forces Personnel, 1982. It will be appropriate to reproduce these provisions for proper appreciation of the contentions raised by respective parties :