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

2006 Supreme(J&K) 209

NIRMAL SINGH
Govind Ram (Ex. Hav. ) – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Advocate For Appellant: Dharam Paul
Advocate For Respondent: Piyush Gupta
Advocate For Respondent: V.K. Magoo

1. Petitioner was enrolled in the army on 22nd April69 and successfully completed the military training. He was then promoted to the rank of Havildar w.e.f. 1st Jan83. Petitioner was invalidated out of service in low medical category EEE w.e.f. 2nd Nov88. The Invaliding Medical Board assessed the disability of the petitioner at 40%. Petitioner preferred his claim for disability pension but the respondents allowed the disability at 20% instead of 40% in medical category EEE. The grievance of the petitioner is that he represented before the respondents for considering his claim regarding grant of disability pension as per the assessment made by the Invaliding Medical Board but no action was taken by respondents.

2. On notice, respondents have filed counter in which they have admitted that the petitioner was invalidated out of service being a low-medical category EEE w.e.f. 3rd Nov88, under Army Rule 13(3) item III (iii) due invaliding disability "Lumbar Canal Stenosis (OPTD) and the Invaliding Medical Board assessed the disability of the petitioner at 40% but according to para 17(a)(ii) of Entitlement Rules as amended by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence Corrigendum No. 1(1










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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top