IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

207 Date of decision: 06.02.2025 Parveen Salaria ...Petitioner VERSUS Union of India and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Navdeep Singh, Advocate and Ms. Srishti Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Somesh Gupta, Sr. Panel Counsel, for respondent-UOI.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

1. Challenging the rejection letter/order dated 24.07.2000 whereby the claim of the petitioner for disability pension/Monthly Ex-gratia Allowance was rejected on the ground that the disability was not attributable to or aggravated by military service, the petitioner has approached this Court.

2. Twin prayer has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the instant writ petition, firstly in relation to grant of Ex-gratia allowance, in terms of the scheme for grant of Ex-gratia award in case of death/disablement of cadets due to causes attributable to or aggravated by military training, as issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence vide memo No.1(5)/93/D/(PEN-C) dated 16.04.1996, while the second prayer for directing the respondents to act upon the recommendation of the Committee of Experts dated 24.11.2015 in relation to grant of disability pension.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner gives up his prayer for grant of disability pension in terms of recommendations of the Committee of Experts dated 24.11.2015 and confines his prayer only to grant of Ex-gratia award under the notified Scheme dated 16.04.1996.

4. Briefly summarised, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that consequent upon clearing the UPSC Examination, the petitioner was selected to join the Indian Army as a Commissioned Officer and he joined the Officers Training Academy (OTA) on 03.05.1999 as a Gentlemen Cadet No.20347. He contends that during the course of strenuous physical training, the petitioner developed the disability of “Osteoarthritis of Right Hip Joint and Avascular Necrosis of Head of Femur.” The medical authorities recorded that the said disability developed after training and running and as a direct result of fall during the “race back in a military cross-country race during a bona fide military training exercise. The disability was assessed to be progressive and could further be worsened by continued military training. The same was recorded by the respondent- authorities to be a disability that was attributable to and aggravated by the military service itself. The petitioner was first placed in low medical category, but was finally invalidated out of service on 17.11.1999 on worsening of his medical conditions.

5. The counsel argues that no Ex-gratia allowance/disability pension etc. were sanctioned to the petitioner, even though the disability was traceable to the circumstances that were attributable to the military service and had been aggravated as a result thereof, hence, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent-authorities but the claim was rejected by the respondents vide the impugned communication dated 24.07.2000 for the following reasons:-

“CLAIM TO DISABILITY PENSION IN RESPECT OF EX-GC PARVEEN SALARIA

1. Ref. your application dated 10 Apr and 04 Jul 2000.

2. The case of your son for grant of disability pension has been examined by the competent authority in light of relevant provisions. The ID has been considered neither attributable to nor aggravated with military services. Accordingly claim of ex-gratia disability pension has been rejected.”

6. Aggrieved thereof the instant writ petition has been filed.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the information sought by the petitioner from the respondent- authorities under the RTI Act, 2005 (which such document has not been disputed or denied by the respondents) pertaining to the medical record of the OTA MI Room Madras-16. The relevant extract of the said referral form i