SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(SC) 563

Supreme Court of India
G.S. SINGHVI, RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, SHARAD ARVIND BOBDE, JJ.
Veer Pal Singh
Versus
Secretary, Ministry of Defence
Civil Appeal No. 5922 of 2012
Decided on : 02-07-2013

Headnote:

Armed Forces Tribunal Act - Military service - Claim for disability pension - He was downgraded to Medical Category CEE for period of six months with effect His case was considered Invaliding Medical Board held at Military Hospital Meerut and on its recommendations he was discharged from service - His claim for disability pension was rejected by Principal Controller of Defence Accounts Pension Allahabad on ground that disease Schizophrenic Reaction which was cause of his discharge was not attributable to military service – Held, Theory and Practice of Psychiatry by Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology then they would have definitely found that observation made substantially incompatible with existing literature on subject and conclusion recorded by Invaliding Medical Board that was case of Schizophrenic Reaction was not well founded and required review in context of observation made by herself that with treatment appellant had improved - Considered view having regard to peculiar facts of this case Tribunal should have ordered constitution of Review Medical Board for re examination of appellant - Controller of Accounts which reliance has been placed by Tribunal Court referred to Regulations and of Pension Regulations and that definite opinion formed by Medical Board that disease suffered by respondent was constitutional and was not attributable to Military Service was binding and High Court was not justified in directing payment of disability pension to respondent - Reiterated in Ministry neither of those cases Court was called upon to consider situation where Medical Board had entirely relied upon an inchoate opinion expressed by Psychiatrist and no effort was made to consider improvement made in degree of illness after treatment - Appeal allowed

Judgment :

G. S. Singhvi, J.

1. This appeal is directed against order dated 19.12.2011 of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Lucknow Bench (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) dismissing the application filed by the appellant for grant of leave to file appeal against orders dated 14.7.2011 and 16.9.2011 passed in Transferred Application No.1431/2010 and Review Application No.22/2011 respectively.

2. The appellant was enrolled in the Army (Corps of Signals) on 20.6.1972 in Medical Category “AYE”. Before his enrolment, the appellant was subjected to medical examination, the report (Annexure R-II) of which is reproduced below:

3. After completion of training, the appellant was posted in 54 Infantry Division Signals Regiment and his regular service commenced with effect from 21.2.1974. After about two years, he was admitted in Military Hospital, Secunderabad for the treatment of “INTESTINAL-COLIC”. He was discharged from the hospital on 18.2.1976. Between March, 1976 to October, 1977 he was treated in different Army Hospitals at Pune, Secunderabad and Meerut. He was downgraded to Medical Category “CEE” (Temporary) for a period of six months with effect from 3.1.1977. His case was considered on 14.11.1977 by the Invaliding Medical Board held at Military Hospital, Meerut and on its recommendations, he was discharged from service. His claim for disability pension was rejected by Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension), Allahabad on the ground that the disease, i.e., Schizophrenic Reaction, which was the cause of his discharge was not attributable to the military service.

4. The appellant challenged his discharge from military service and rejection of his claim for disability pension in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.42946/1997 filed before the Allahabad High Court. He prayed that a fresh Medical Board be constituted to assess his disease and disability. The same was disposed of by the Allahabad High Court vide order dated 26.3.1998 and a direction was given to the competent authority to decide the appellant’s representation. Thereafter, the Government of India, Ministry of Defence rejected the appellant’s representation vide order dated 16.9.1998, paragraph 9 of which reads thus:

“You have been diagnosed as a case of SCHIZOPHRENIC REACTION and not LUNATIC. As such your request to produce you before a medical board to examine you whether you are Lunatic or free from LUNACY does not arise. Therefore no resurvey medical board can be held in your case.”

5. The appellant challenged the aforesaid order in Writ Petition No.40430/1999 and prayed that the respondents be directed to constitute a Review Medical Board to reevaluate his disease.

6. The second writ petition filed by the appellant remained pending before the High Court for 13 years. On the establishment of Lucknow Bench of the Tribunal under the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 (for short, ‘the Act’), the same was transferred to the Tribunal and was registered as Transferred Application No.1431/2010. The Tribunal

“PRIMARY MEDICAL EXAMINATION REPORT

“Table” examined the record of the Medical Board, referred to the judgment of this Court in Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. A.V. Damodaran (2009) 9 SCC 140 and dismissed the application by making the following observations:

“In view of the aforesaid the Medical Board’s opinion is to be accorded supremacy. We in exercise of our jurisdiction can not sit over the opinion expressed by the Medical Board which is an expert body. The disease that the applicant was suffering from has been found to be constitutional and not aggravated by military service. We can not hold anything contrary to the medical opinion.”

7. The review application and the application filed by the appellant for grant of leave to appeal were dismissed by the Tribunal with a cryptic observation that the recommendations made by the Medical Board are binding and the same cannot be subjected to judicial review.

8. The appellant, who appeared in person, referred to report dated 2








































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top