PIAR CHAND Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Sh. Piar Chand was enrolled as Sepoy in 6th Dogra Regiment on 20th September, 1975. During his military service be was entrusted with the duty of driving Motor Vehicle. The petitioner was discharged on I -1 -1982 by the Officer Commanding, 176 Regiment of the basis of having been invalidated out of service by the Medical Board. The medical examination report at the time of discharge of the petitioner has been annexed as Annexure D. According to the petitioner, it was clear from the report that ht was put in medical category EEE and was brought before invalidation medical board The petitioner pleaded that a certificate issued by 161 Base Hospital on 30th September, 1981 clearly showed that the petitioner was found suitable for employment in Civil, which is annexed as Annexure E In so far as the petitioners career was concerned the reliability of the petitioner has been rated as high and the petitioner was shown very keen and energetic with initiative and sense of responsibility,

(2.) The petitioners simple case has been that he had been agitating for the family pension and he made representation in this behalf through the Sainik Welfare Board and it was on April 8, 1991 that the disability pension in favour of the petitioner was refused. Appeal preferred in this behalf was also not allowed. The action on the part of the respondents had been assailed to be illegal, unwarranted and against the Rules and Regulations of the Military Rules and the fundamental rights of the petitioner as enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Through the present petition preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prayed for the issue of writ of Mandamus against the respondents directing them : - (i) to grant disability pension in favour of the petitioner from the date of his discharge; (ii) the arrears due to the petitioner may also be paid to him ; (iii) the petitioner be awarded adequate compensation for the delay in grant of pension.

(3.) The respondents have not admitted the claim put in by the petitioner and in their reply have assailed the reliefs asked for by the petitioner on various grounds According to the respondents, petitioner was enrolled as Driver Mechanical Transport by trade as per his desire at the time of enrolment. The petitioner was invalidated out of service on 1st January, 1982 by a duly constituted Invalidating Medical Board due to a disease Epilepsy 345 V -67. It was further pleaded that disability of the petitioner was assessed at 20 per cent but it was neither attributable to nor aggravated by the military service but the said Medical Board. Respondents simple case has been that the petitioner was not entitled for disability pension in terms of Regulation 1/3 of Pension Regulations for the Army 1961, (Part I).