JAGDISH SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts which are not in dispute are as under: - Petitioner was enrolled in the army on 31st March79 and was allotted No.13742577 -N. After completion of basic military training, he was posted to 8 JAK Rifles on 9th Feb80. He was invalided out of service on 20th Aug95, on medical grounds and was placed in medical category EEE. He was diagnosed as a case of Schizophrenia -295 and his disability was assessed at 70%. The petitioner applied for disability pension and his case was forwarded to the office of Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension), Allahabad, for adjudication vide letter No. SR/13742577/DP dated 24th Aug96. The said authority considered the claim of the petitioner for grant of disability pension and rejected the same on the ground that the disability suffered by the petitioner is neither attributable to nor aggravated by army service. The petitioner preferred an appeal which was forwarded to the Government of India, Ministry of Defence vide letter No.G3/95/114/9/91/11 dt. 5th Sept97. The appeal of the petitioner, however, was also rejected and the petitioner was intimated about the same vide letter No. 7(2116)/97.D (Pen. A&AC) dated 3rd July2000.

(2.) IN para 1 of the objections, it has been stated as under: - "....As per medical opinion the petitioner emotionally went to the temple on 12 Nov 1994 and offered his tongue to Goddess Durga believing that she will protect him. He was admitted to Military Hospital Bareilly on 19 Nov 1994 for psychiatric evaluation."

(3.) AGAIN in para 2 of the objections, the stand taken by respondents is as under: - ".... Government of India, Ministry of Defence vide their letter No.7(2116)/97.D (Pen.& A&AC) dated 03 July 2000 intimated directly to the petitioner that his disability pension appeal has been rejected on account of which he was invalided out of service. The partial amputation of tongue (self inflicted) by him with abnormal behaviour. There was no close time relationship between ID and any stressful factors/filed posting. Therefore, his disability was regarded neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service by duly constituted medical board. Hence, he is not entitled for disability pension under the rule."