1. The petitioner's son - Shri Om Parkash enrolled as Rifleman/Clerk in Indian Army on 25th May, 1977 and al#31;lotted No. 13740264, after serving in Indian Army for more than five years. The petitioner's son was discharged from service on 15th August, 1982 on medical grounds under medical cat#31;egory ‘E'. The Army Medical Board found Shri Om Parkash to be suffering from "SCHIZOPHRENIA 295" and not fit for fur#31;ther services of Armed Forces. He was, accordingly, invalided out of service on 16th August, 1982 under Army Rule 13(3) item III (iii). The Medical Board also opined that the disability found was not related to military service and was a constitutional disorder. Accordingly, Shri Om Parkash was not granted dis#31;ability pension being not eligible for such benefit in terms of para - 197 & 198 of Pension Regulation for the Army 1961 (Part I). However, Invalid Gratuity of Rs. 1,742.55 (Rupees one thousand seven hundred forty two and fifty five paise only), Terminal Credit Balance and some other benefits were granted to the petitioner's son. Notwithstanding his ineligibility for grant of disability pension, a claim was forwarded to the Pension Sanctioning Authority - Prin#31;cipal Controller of Defence Accounts Pension (PCDA) (P) Allahabad vide No. C2/17440264/Pen dated 26th July, 1982. The Authority did not find any merit in the claim, and the decision was communicated to Shri Om Parka vide No. C2/13740264/Pen/17 dated 18th October, 1982. He preferred an ap#31;peal against the aforementioned order to the Government of India, however, the Government of India did not find any reason to alter the decision of PCDA (P) Allahabad and dismissed the appeal. A second appeal was preferred to the De#31;fence Minister's Appellate Committee without any success. The- petitioner pleading that her son was suffering from psychiatric disorder and having no men#31;tal capacity to agitate his rights, has filed writ petition on hand to question the order of Principal Controller of De#31;fence Accounts (Pension), PCDA (P) Allahabad dated 26th July, 1982, whereby claim for disability pension has been rejected.

2. The petitioner's case is that as her son at the time of his enrollment in Indian Army was found by the Medi#31;cal Board to be physically and mentally fit and recommended for enrollment, the ailment that surfaced five years af#31;ter his enrollment is attributable and aggravated by Army service. The peti#31;tioner disputes that the ailment de#31;tected, i.e. "SCHIZOPHRENIA" (Cata#31;tonic) 295 is a constitutional disorder, disentitling the petitioner from disabil#31;ity pension. The petitioner insists that her son is entitled to disability pension under Army Pension Regulation 173, inasmuch as, he was boarded out from service on account of disability and in terms of Appendix II to Pension Regula#31;tions, the disease that leads to dis#31;charge of an individual is to be ordi#31;narily deemed to be related to Army service.

3. The writ petition is resisted by the respondents on the ground that as the disability detected was found by Army Medical Board to be neither at#31;tributable nor aggravated by military service but a constitutional disorder, the petitioner's son was not entitled to disability pension. The respondents dis#31;pute that Army Pension Regulation 173 or Para 181 of Pension Regulation was attracted in the matter. It is reiterated that the petitioner's claim having been rejected by PCDA (P) Allahabad, and, thereafter, his first appeal and second appeal found bereft of any merit, the petitioner had no right to maintain the petition.

4. I have gone through the plead#31;ings as well as record available on the file and have heard learned counsel for the parties.

5. Grant of disability and other pen#31;sions to army personnel is regulated by Pension Regulations in the Army, 1961, Rule 173 and Appendix II to the Regula#31;tions are relevant to the present con#31;troversy and required to be noticed. Rule 173 reads as under:

" 173. U

Click Here to Read the rest of this document