SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DIPAK MISRA, R. BANUMATHI, JJ.
EX. GNR. LAXMANRAM POONIA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. – APPELLANT
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2633 OF 2017
Decided On : 22-02-2017
Facts of Case:
Instant appeal arises out of order passed by Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Jaipur, Rajasthan in O.A. thereby declining award of disability pension to appellant. Tribunal also dismissed M.A. filed by appellant seeking leave to appeal under Section 31 of Armed Forces Tribunal Act.
Findings of Court:
Tribunal did not examine case at hand in light of Army Pension Regulations, 1961, Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982 and General Rules of Guide to Medical Officers (Military Pensions) 2002 and, therefore, impugned order cannot be sustained. Applying the principles of Dharamvir Singh's case and Rajbir Singh's case, it has to be presumed that disability of appellant bore a casual connection with service conditions.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
R. Banumathi J.
This appeal arises out of the order dated 21.03.2014 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Jaipur, Rajasthan in O.A. No. 200 of 2010, thereby declining award of disability pension to the appellant. The Tribunal vide order dated 23.02.2016 also dismissed M.A. No. 390 of 2015 filed by the appellant seeking leave to appeal under Section 31 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act.
2. The facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are as follows:- The appellant was enrolled in the Indian Army on 14.09.2005. His basic military training was convened at Army Air Defence Centre Nasik Road Camp, commencing from 16.09.2005 and after completion of training, he was posted at 27 AD Regiment for further service. It is the case of the appellant that on the eve of Diwali Festival in November, 2007, he was overburdened with work due to scarcity of staff. Due to continuous restless duty hours for several days, he suffered hypertension resulting in lack of sleep and hunger. Ultimately, he requested the Commanding Officer of his Unit to sanction him leave considering his critical condition. However, instead of granting leave, the Commanding Officer got him admitted in 174 Military Hospital on 11.11.2007, acknowledging the critical condition of the appellant. The Doctor diagnosed the appellant to be suffering from acute schizophrenia like psychotic disorder. The appellant was discharged from 174 Military Hospital on 14.03.2008. Thereafter, he was shifted to Military Hospital Chandimandir and was admitted to psychiatric ward on 28.08.2008. He was subjected to a Military Board held at 174 Military Hospital for his recategorisation. After some time, he was granted sick leave for a few days. However, he was again admitted to 174 Military Hospital on 15.02.2009, and was also subjected to a Medical Board and thereafter, he was discharged from the hospital and was sent to his Unit.
3. As per the appellant, he was again entrusted with hard duty on 02.05.2009 and was also compelled to work at night hours, because of which the disease so detected again aggravated. Ultimately, he had to be admitted to Command Hospital Chandimandir on 05.05.2009, from where he got discharged on 12.06.2009. He was again admitted to Command Hospital Chandimandir on 10.07.2009, from where he was discharged on 06.10.2009. He was brought before a duly constituted Invaliding Medical Board on 09.09.2009 to assess the cause and degree of disablement. The Invaliding Medical Board opined that he was suffering from `acute Schizophrenia like psychotic disorder'. Medical Board further opined that the disability being constitutional in nature is not connected with Military Service. His disability was assessed at 60% for life but was viewed as neither attributable to nor aggravated by Military Service. Ultimately, he was invalided out of service with effect from 07.10.2009 under Rule 13(3)(iii) of the Army Rules, 1954. His claim for grant of disability pension was forwarded to the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) Allahabad, which was rejected vide order dated 02.07.2010 on the ground that the disability suffered by the applicant is neither attributable to nor aggravated by Military Service.
4. The appellant challenged the order dated 02.07.2010 by filing an application before the Tribunal seeking disability pension. The Tribunal dismissed the application filed by the appellant holding that the disability being `constitutional' in nature is not connected with Military Service. His disability was assessed at 60% for life; but was viewed as neither attributable to nor aggravated by Military Service. The Tribunal specifically held that though the Invaliding Medical Board categorically opined that he was suffering from `Acute Schizophrenia like psychotic disorder', the disability of the applicant being constitutional in nature cannot be considered to be connected with Military Service. Thus, holding that there was no casual connection between disablem
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.