IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Reserved on: 28.11.2024 Pronounced on: 07.01.2025 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Petitioners Versus No. 2958692 EX SEPOY RAM NARAIN AND ANR. ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Argued by: Mr. Parvesh K. Saini, Sr. Panel Counsel for the petitioner/UOI.

Mr. Arshit Goel, Advocate and Mr. Ajay Sheoran, Advocate for respondent No. 1.

****

SURESHWAR THAKUR , J .

1. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner herein- Union of India, prays for the setting aside of the order dated 15.02.2022 (Annexure P-1), as passed by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal concerned, wherebys, the claim of respondent No. 1 for the grant of disability pension was allowed.

Factual Background

2. Respondent No. 1 was enrolled in the Indian Army on 03.06.1965 and was discharged on 17.06.1972 under Item III (iii)(a)(i)

of Army Rule 13 (3) III (V) after having rendered 7 years and 14 days of service. He was not in receipt of any kind of pension.

3. It has been averred in paragraph No. 5 of the writ petition that in accordance with Para 592-596 of the Defence Service Regulation for the Army (Revised Edition), 1987, the service documents in respect of the pensioners are required to be retained for a period of 50 years and the service documents in respect of non- pensioners are required to be retained for a period of 25 years from date of discharge. Accordingly, service documents of respondent No. 1 were destroyed after the expiry of 25 years, being a non-pensioner after entering relevant details in the Long Roll.

4. Thereafter, respondent No. 1 after a delay of about 47 years from the date of discharge filed O.A. No. 800 of 2020, before the learned Armed Forces Tribunal concerned, thus for the grant of disability pension. The said O.A., became allowed vide order dated 15.02.2022. The operative part of the said order is extracted hereinafter.

“ 7. As a matter of fact, the case of Bhoom Singh is identical to the present one because in that case also service record/medical record of the applicant was not available with the respondents. However, irrespective of it he having been found to have discharged from service after being placed in low medical category (EEE), was held entitled to the grant of disability pension relying upon the discharge certificate he placed on record. In the case in hand also relevant extract of the discharge certificate (Annexure A-1) has been placed on record. Otherwise also, there is no denial to the applicant having been invalided out of military service on medical ground. In Sukhvinder Singh's case (supra) the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that as and when a member of Armed Forces personnel is invalided out of military service it has to be presumed perforce that his disability was above 20 % and as per Rules/Regulations he is entitled to the grant of disability pension. The disability leading to invaliding the applicant out of service would attract the grant of pension treating the disability as 50 %.

5. Feeling aggrieved from the aforesaid order as passed upon the O.A. (supra), by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal concerned, the petitioner-Union of India has filed thereagainst the instant writ petition before this Court.

Submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners.

6. (a) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits, that respondent No. 1 was not entitled to file O.A., before the Tribunal concerned, after a delay of about 47 years from the date of his discharge, more especially after the happening of an elongated elapse of about 25 years, since the destruction of his service documents, thus after the expiry of the apposite retention period.

(b) The learned Tribunal failed to appreciate, that owing to an inordinate delay by respondent No. 1, in preferring his claim for grant of disability pension, his service documents including medical board proceedings were destroyed as per the relevant provisions regarding retention of d