BAHADUR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner joined the Army on 15th July, 1963 and was invalidated out from service on 22nd January, 1966 and awarded a disability pension on the basis of the proceedings of the medical Board. His case for the continuance of disability pension was considered by three different re-survey medical boards and, but for a short period between 19th January, 1976 and 25th November, 1977, his disability was reassessed as less than 20% by the medical authorities and the disability pension was admittedly paid. The petitioner was brought before the re-survey medical board on 25th March, 1997 for the fifth time and, as a consequence thereto, he received a communication dated 22nd September 1997, Annexure P-1 to the petition, that his disability pension had been discontinued with effect from 10th June, 1997 for a period of five years. This order has been challenged in these proceedings.

(2.) Notice of motion was issued in this case and a reply has been put in by the respondents. The stand taken is that the petitioner's disability had been assessed at less than 20 per cent and, as such, his disability pension had been rightly discontinued with effect from 10th June, 1997. It has also been pleaded that the statutory remedy by way of an appeal lay to the Government of India and as the same had not been exhausted, the writ petition was not maintainable. In para 4 of the reply it has been pleaded that the petitioner's disability had been re-assessed by the medical authorities and accepted at less than 20 per cent for five years w.e.f. June 10, 1997 to March 25, 2002 by the CCDA (Pensions) Allahabad who was the delegated authority of the Government of India, Ministry of Defence to deal with such matters.

(3.) Mr. R.S. Randhawa, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has argued that the petitioner had been granted disability pension for more than 30 years but for a short break between January 1976 and November 1977 and by virtue of the provisions of Regulation 185A of Pension Regulations for the Army Part-I-1961 (wrongly mentioned as paragraph 60-A in the petition), the pension having been paid for more than 30 years could not be denied at this stage. In this connection, he has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in C.W.P. No. 1047 of 1995 (Ex-Sepoy Kulwant Singh v. Union of India and others) decided on 19th January, 1996. He has in addition, argued that it was evident from Annexure P-1 that the disability pension had been discontinued at the instance of the C.C.D.A.(Pension) Allahabad, and as this authority had on no occasion examined the petitioner so as to assess his disability and no reasons were forthcoming on the record as to why his disability had been re-assessed as being below 20 per cent, the order Annexure P-1 could not be sustained. In this connection, reliance has been placed on various judgments of this Court as well as other High Courts reported as Sq. Ldr. G.S. Cheema v. Union of India and others, 1991 1 SCT 146(P&H) ; Wing Commander R.L. Sharma (Retd.) v. Union of India, 1994 4 SCT 268 through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, New Delhi and others, (SC); Munshi Ram v. Union of India and others,1996 2 RSJ 705(DB) H.P.; Ex Capt. Harbhajan Singh v. The Secretary Ministry of Defence, Government of India, New Delhi and others, 1996 4 SCT 222(P&H), and Ujagar Singh v. Union of India and others,1997 4 RSJ 587.