LAWS(HPH)-2014-7-110

UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAM KRISHAN

Decided On July 23, 2014
UNION OF INDIA Appellant
V/S
RAM KRISHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ -respondent has filed this appeal against judgment dated 22.6.2007 passed by learned Single Judge in CWP No. 213 of 2006 whereby he allowed the petition and directed the grant of disability pension to the writ -petitioner w.e.f. 1.2.2005.

(2.) THE brief facts as necessary are that the writ petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Army on 8.10.1979 and was suffered battle casualty on 5.1.2002, resulting in his discharge after completion of 25 and 106 days of service. The writ petitioner was placed in the low medical classification after holding Medical Board. He was subsequently asked to appear before the Re survey Medical Board on 4th December, 2004. He was declared invalided and recommended him "fit to release from service in medical category S, H, A2 (P) P,E with effect from 31.1.2005. His disability was declared attributable to army service and was recorded more than 30%. He was discharged on 31.1.2005 and the reason of discharge was shown as "completion of tenure of his service" under Army Rule 13 (3) and was granted service pension of Rs. 5643/ - per month with effect from 1.2.2005. He was not granted disability pension even though his disability was assessed at more than 30% which was attributable to the Army service. He was informed on 7th March, 2005 that since he was discharged on compassionate ground he was not entitled to the disability pension.

(3.) THE learned Single Judge after taking into consideration the aforesaid letter dated 13.10.2004 concluded that though the writ petitioner had made a request for discharge, the same could not be considered as voluntary retirement as the same was based on medical grounds. Therefore, the case of the petitioner would fall under Rule 13 (3) II (ii) and on that basis he would be entitled to get disability pension. Reliance was also placed upon the judgment of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Ex. Subedar Baljor Singh vs. Union of India and others, 1997 LabIC 1818for reaching the aforesaid conclusion.