Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 2029 (PNJ)

Jit Ram v. Union Of India

2009-11-23

PERMOD KOHLI

body2009
Judgment Permod Kohli, J. 1. C.M. No. 16569 of 2009 The writ petition is taken up for final disposal today itself. C.M. disposed of. C.W.P. No.5297 of 1998 This petition has been filed through Smt. Janak Dulari on behalf of her husband Jit Ram who is said to be suffering from mental disease Schizophrenia-295. 2. The husband of the petitioner joined the GREP, now called Border Road Organization on 4.4.1962. He was allocated the trade of Operator OEM Bulldoxer Operator. It is the case of the petitioner that her husband was transferred to Sikkim where he suffered from the disease due to stress and strain of service in the field area. He was admitted in the Military Hospital Barrackpore on 9.3.69. He was diagnosed as a case of Schizophrenia-295 in the lower medical category "EEE" (G-IV) with 100% disability. He was brought before the Invalidating Medical Board in the Military Hospital, Barrackpore which declared her husband unfit for military service and medically boarded out with 100% disability on 24.5.1969. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not been given pension including service as also disability elements, inspire of various representations and service of demand notice. 3. Reply has been filed by the respondents. In the reply, it has been admitted that the petitioner was discharged on medical grounds. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. It is admitted case of the parties that at the time of recruitment, the petitioners husband was found medically fit and he had no such problem. The petitioners husband developed the problem after almost 7 years of joining the service. This fact cannot be lost sight of that the military service carries great stress and strains, particularly when the military personnels are deployed not only during war, but even at the time of law and order problem and other natural calamities alongwith in the Border areas. Their life is full of stress and strains. Such a disease is not unknown in such cases. It is also not recorded by the Medical Board that a disease could not be detected at the time of petitioners entry in service. Similar issue came up before various Courts from time to time. Their life is full of stress and strains. Such a disease is not unknown in such cases. It is also not recorded by the Medical Board that a disease could not be detected at the time of petitioners entry in service. Similar issue came up before various Courts from time to time. Relying upon various judgments of this Court and of the Delhi High Court, a Division Bench of this Court while dealing with the disease of Schizophrenia- 295 in the case of A.J.S. Chaudhary v. Union of India , 1999(1) R.S.J. 778 has held as under :- "19. The ratio of the decisions, referred to herein above, fully support the argument of Shri Randhawa that the rejection of petitioner s claim for disability pension is legally unsustainable because at the time of his acceptance for military service, no note was recorded that he was suffering from Schizophrenia and the opinion recorded by the Medical Board at the time of his discharged from service does not contain a note that the disease was such which could not be detected at the time of petitioners entry in the service. XXX XXX XXX 22. For the reasons mentioned above the writ petition is allowed. The decision of the respondents rejecting the petitioners claim for disability pension is quashed and it is declared that the petitioner is entitled to get disability pension in accordance with Rule 173 read with Appendix-II of the Army Regulations. The respondents are directed to calculate the disability pension payable to the petitioner from the date of discharge from service and pay the same to him within 4 months of the submission of certified copy of this order, else he shall get interest on arrears at the rate of 18% per annum." 5. This Court, while considering similar circumstances in the case of Surjit Singh v. The Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence and others, 1999 (4) R.S.J. 385, has observed as under :- "3. It will be seen that the impugned orders Annexures P-2 and P-5 are based on the assessment made by the CCDA (P) Allahabad and there is no reference medical board. As the CCDA (P) Allahabad or the Medical Authority attached thereto, did not have the occasion of examine the petitioner and had based their assessment only on the record no sanctity can be accorded to such a decision. As the CCDA (P) Allahabad or the Medical Authority attached thereto, did not have the occasion of examine the petitioner and had based their assessment only on the record no sanctity can be accorded to such a decision. It is true, that the respondents have also averred that the petitioners disease was a constitutional one and could not be attributed to military service and that this decision had come from the invaliding Medical Board at the initial stage, but nothing has been put on record with regard to the decision of the said Board. Moreover, a constitutional disease does not ipso facto debar a person from claiming disability pension. This has been also held in Union of India and others v. Sepoy Satwinder Singh and another, 1980 (4) R.S.J. 467." 6. In view of the ratio of the aforesaid judgments and the facts noticed here-in-above, this petition is allowed and consequently the respondents are directed to work out the disability pension payable to the petitioner as his disability was assessed at 100%. Let the claims of the petitioners husband for disability pension be settled in accordance with law, however, the claim shall be restricted to three years preceding the filing of this petition and be released accordingly, within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon the competent authority.