Judgment Permod Kohli, J. 1. The petitioner was discharged from service vide discharge order dated 8.11.2004 on medical grounds as a case of `Alcohol Department Syndrome by placing him under the medical category S-3 (Temp.) on the basis of the opinion of the medical board held on 4.11.2004. After his discharge, he came to his home at village Boddowal, District Ludhiana and was admitted in Military Hospital at Jalandhar Cantt., Jalandhar from 17.9.2004 to 8.11.2004, re-admitted w.e.f. 5.5.2005 to 10.5.2005, again re-admitted w.e.f. 10.7.2005 to 7.2.2006. Even though, the medical board issued a certificate dated 24.1.2006 that the petitioner is fit for civil service, the petitioner is out of the army service on account of the aforesaid discharge. The petitioner applied for disability pension, which request was declined vide order dated 13.8.2007 and 11.9.2007 (Annexures P-6 and P-7) on the grounds that the petitioner is not entitled to get the disability pension under Regulation 173 of the Pension Regulations. 2. The petitioner preferred a second appeal which has also been rejected vide order dated 13.7.2008 (Annexure P-10) stating therein that the case of the petitioner has been considered by the Defence Ministry, Appellate Committee on pension, the Committee has observed that the onset of invaliding disease `Alcohol Dependence Syndrome is on account of over indulgence into drinking and is neither attributable nor aggravated by military service. The petitioner has accordingly filed this petition seeking a direction for disability pension. 3. Disability pension is payable under Regulation 173 which reads as under :- "173 :- Unless otherwise specifically provided a disability pension consisting of service element may be granted to an individual who is invalid out of service on account of a disability which is attributable to or aggravated by military service in non-battle casualty and is assessed 20 per cent or over." 4 The petitioner was enrolled on 22.1.2001. It is admitted case of the petitioner that on account of service stress, he became addict to alcohol. It is, however, stated that it is a by product of the military service. This statement does not seem to be based upon the correct factual background. Even though, consuming of liquor in army is permissible, however, over-drinking is not the norm. Had it been so, all army personel would have become addicts, it is not so. The petitioner of his own over-indulgence became an addict. This statement does not seem to be based upon the correct factual background. Even though, consuming of liquor in army is permissible, however, over-drinking is not the norm. Had it been so, all army personel would have become addicts, it is not so. The petitioner of his own over-indulgence became an addict. Such an addiction cannot be said to be attributable or aggravated by army service. There is also no averment that the petitioner had remained posted in such areas, where there was great stress and strain of service or the climatic conditions forced him to consume liquor to such an extent. The disease is the self-acquired by the petitioner and does not fall within the purview of the Regulation 173. The authorities have rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner for disability pension, I find no merit, petition dismissed. Petition dismissed.