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

2009 Supreme(Raj) 1551

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Mohammad Rafiq, J.
Murlidhar Jat - Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Ors. - Respondent
S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4268 of 2002.
Decided On : 6-02-2009

Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Omprakash Sheoran, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Sanjay Pareek, Advocate.

Headnote:Constitution of India, Art. 300A and 226 – In this case disability pension of the petitioner was reversed only on the basis of record without examining the petitioner – held the action was arbitrary and invalid – as opinion of medical advisor without affording opportunity of examination to the individual acts as only subjective opinion – no decision can be made on it – petitioner was awarded 5 years disability pension with interest.

JUDGMENT

1. :- Petitioner has filed this writ petition aggrieved by discontinuation of payment of pension to him w.e.f. 31/8/1996 and with the further prayer that respondents be directed to grant him disability pension from the said date with arrears on the ground that his disablement was assessed at less than 20% i.e. 11-14% for five years.

2. Shri Omprakash Sheoran, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Army (Army Medical Corps) on 28/9/1965 and was discharged on medical grounds in lower Medical Category (CEE Permanent) on 28/6/1982 after serving the respondents for more than 17 years. Petitioner while serving the respondents suffered from a disease namely; ID- Back Ache with Sciatic Syndrome (Right) . Petitioner acquired this disease due to the conditions of service and stress, which was assessed by the medical board as "attributable to and/or aggravated by Military service" more than 20%. Petitioner was sanctioned and granted disability pension apart from service pension at the time of discharge on 28/6/1982. He was periodically brought before the medical board and continued to get his disability pension. Third medical review board held in the year 1996 at Military Hospital, Jaipur assessed the disability of the petitioner at 20% and attributable it to military service. Said recommendation however was over-ruled by the Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) who accepted disability of the petitioner only as 11-14% and accordingly payment of disability pension was discontinued to the petitioner w.e.f. 31/8/1986. Dissatisfied with the decision of the CCDA (P) Allahabad, petitioner filed an appeal before the Government of India, Ministry of Defence on the premise that extent of disability as opined by medical board could not be reduced prejudicially to the petitioner by PCDA(P) Allahabad without referring the petitioner to the higher medical board/authority. Appeal however was dismissed by the Government of India vide order dated 30/4/1997. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner was again brought before the medical board on 14/7/2001 and this time, the medical board assessed his disability at less than 20% (11-14%) in view of decision of CCDA (Pension) for life. It was so conveyed to the petitioner by Records, Army Medical Corps vide order dated 30/10/2001. Petitioner preferred appeal thereagainst before the Government of India Ministry of Defence. Respondents have now brought on record of this writ petition, his disability certificate. Petitioner's appeal was placed before the appellate committee i.e. PCDA(P) Allahabad, who in turn forwarded the same to the Government of India, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi where, it is pending adjudication. The case of the petitioner was reviewed by the Review Medical Board on 14/7/2001 which assessed his disability at less than 20% i.e. 11 to 14% for life. The claim was adjudicated by PCDA(P) Allahabad which assessed the disability of the petitioner at less than 20% for life w.e.f. 26/7/2001. His appeal against fresh assessment made by Last Review Medical Board was allowed by Appellate Committee of the Central Government, vide its order dated 14/7/2001 which again held him disability at 20% for life. Petitioner has been accordingly issued fresh Pension Payment Order (PPO). Writ petition therefore survives only in regard to discontinuation of disability pension to the petitioner for the period intervening between 31/8/1996 to 25/7/2001.

3. Shri Omprakash Sheoran, learned counsel for the petitioner has relying on the judgment of Supreme Court in Ex.Sapper Mohinder Singh v. U.O.I., Civil Appeal No.164/1993 decided on January 14, 1993 argued that in that case it was held by their Lordships that that disability assessed at 20% by the medical board which had personally examined the petitioner, could not be reduced by Pension Payment Authority and payment of disability pension could be discontinued only if fresh medical board examined

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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