JUDGMENT Virender Singh, J.- 1. The instant Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment/order dated 29th of November, 1999 of learned single Judge passed in OWP No. 841/1997 whereby respondent (for short 'petitioner') has been held entitled to disability pension, consequently appellant-Union of India has been directed to release the same in his favour along with interest at the rate of 12%. Record reveals that operation of impugned judgment has not been stayed by this Court. Mr. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is regularly getting the pension as directed by learned Writ Court. 2. It needs to be mentioned here that the instant appeal came to be dismissed in default for want of prosecution at one stage, but subsequently restored. 3. The petitioner was enrolled as a Sepoy in Indian Army on 16th of June, 1976. He was boarded out of Army Service w.e.f. 5th of July, 1983 on the ground that he was suffering from 'Schizophrenic Psychosis' (Catatonic), 295. His disability was assessed at 30%, but was not allowed pension on the ground that the said disease is not attributable to army service. 4. The case set up by the petitioner as one finds from the averments made in the writ petition was that he was enrolled in Indian Army after having been declared medically fit for Army Service, on examination by the Army Medical Board and at that time, no note/entry was made that he was suffering from any such disease like the one for which he has been boarded out. Further his case was that throughout his service career, his conduct remained exemplary, but due to continuous stress and strain of military service and the tough life, he fell ill and was admitted in Army Hospital whereafter he was placed in category EEE permanently and subsequently, the Medical Board finally declared him unfit for military service on account of the aforesaid disease. The petitioner further asserted that thereafter he asked for disability pension, but his case was rejected by the Combined Defence Accounts (P) Allahabad wherein it was stated that disability suffered during the service was not attributable to the army service. This constrained him to knock at the door of this Court vide OWP No. 841/1997. 5. The petitioner further asserted that thereafter he asked for disability pension, but his case was rejected by the Combined Defence Accounts (P) Allahabad wherein it was stated that disability suffered during the service was not attributable to the army service. This constrained him to knock at the door of this Court vide OWP No. 841/1997. 5. Writ Court record reveals that no counter has been filed by Union of India before learned Writ Court, but during the course of arguments, the stand taken by it was that in certain cases of genital heredity, this type of disease generates even after an individual has joined the service, therefore, in such type of cases, the entitlement of disability pension is not permissible unless it is clearly asserted that the cause of generation of disease is only because of army service. 6. The plea taken by Union of India was rejected by the learned Writ Court on the ground that it was for the army authority to bring on record that the disease from which the petitioner was suffering was hereditary in nature, whereas the pro forma, prepared by the Medical Board which led to boarding the petitioner out of service, does not make any mention of any such fact, but for making an entry in one of the columns that 'Schizophrenic Psychosis' (Catatonic), 295 is a constitutional disorder. The learned Writ Court while relying upon a judgment of Division Bench of this Court rendered in case titled Balwant Singh v. Union of India (LPA No. 521/1998) decided on 17th of November, 1999 with regard to the same very disease, observed that this disease can be acquired on account of hazards of army service, as such, held the petitioner entitled to the disability pension. 7. Union of India had also joined issue with regard to delay in moving the Court by petitioner, but the same was also rejected as irrelevant. 8. We have heard Mr. Jamwal, learned CGSC appearing for appellant-Union of India and Mr. Chauhan learned counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner. Writ court record is also perused by us. 9. Assailing the impugned judgment, Mr. Jamwal once again reiterates the same stand as taken before learned Writ Court, stating that the disease from which the petitioner was suffering is neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service, as such, unconnected with the service condition. Chauhan learned counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner. Writ court record is also perused by us. 9. Assailing the impugned judgment, Mr. Jamwal once again reiterates the same stand as taken before learned Writ Court, stating that the disease from which the petitioner was suffering is neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service, as such, unconnected with the service condition. He submits that the opinion rendered by the Medical Board is an opinion given by an expert in the field, therefore, the same should not be brushed aside. While referring to Regulation 173 of Army Rules, Mr. Jamwal submits that it is in the realm of the Medical Board to render its opinion as to the attributability of the disease vis-à-vis the military service and that such an opinion is a final and conclusive and in the absence of any change made to the said opinion, the learned single Judge was not justified in ignoring the opinion of the Medical board. 10. Mr. Jamwal also took us to the academic side of the disease while referring to the scientific study of brain and nervous system called as 'Neuroscience' or 'Neurobiology' stating that the brain is more superior and different from modern computers, but which part of brain can be termed as centralized brain, or the control centre of human behaviour, is perhaps unknown. He submits that there are lot of brain consuming hypothesis and perhaps there are many questions for which we do not have the answers at the moment and that despite having made so much progress in science, we still do not know much about how the brain works and much of its functioning is still shrouded in mystery as unlike other organs such as the pancreas, liver, gall bladder or for that matter even heart. He submits that brain is not a single organ with a single function, instead it is an organ with thousands of interlocking and co-operating functions. He submits that the human brain is a co-operative or perhaps thousands of mini brains and is much integrated that it functions and appears as one, but is composed of perhaps thousands of individual reactive decision mechanisms, and the mechanisms act so fast and in such harmony that we perceive the entire system functioning as being executed by a single unit. Therefore, according to Mr. Therefore, according to Mr. Jamwal, the physical features some times are not connected with the brain function and the disease like 'Schizophrenic Psychosis' (Catatonic), 295 for which the petitioner has been boarded out, does not surface at a particular stage and this appears to be the reason that when the petitioner was inducted into army service, the said disease from which he was suffering could not be noticed by the Medical Board, but the fact of the matter is that it was a constitutional disorder which surfaced after few years of his rendering service when he fell ill and admitted in the hospital. 11. We do appreciate the attempt made by Mr. Jamwal to dislodge the case of the petitioner, but, in our considered view, it is an attempt in futility as we are not deciding the case on academic side instead testing it within the parameters of Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961, in particular, regulation 173. 12. The issue involved in this case has already been set at rest by Division Bench of this Court in a case titled Union of India v. Ravinder Kumar, reported as 2008 (1) JKJ 579 (HC), wherein while referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in case titled Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) and others v. S. Balachandran Nair, reported as 2005 AIR SCW 5296: ( AIR 2005 SC 4391 :2005 Lab IC 5296) implication of regulation 173 was set out. The Division Bench in the said case while making full reference to regulation 423 (C) in paragraph 14 has held as under: In terms of Clause (c) of the above rule a disease which led to an individual's discharge will ordinarily be deemed to have arisen during service if no note of it was made at the time of the individual's induction into the military service, But in such a case if medical opinion holds for reasons to be recorded that the disease could not have been detected on medical examination prior to acceptance for service such disease would not be deemed to have arisen during service. Thus even if the release Medical Board has opined that the disease is constitutional, therefore, could not have arisen during military service, still it shall in view of Clause (c) which creates a statutory presumption be deemed to have arisen during military service, if no note of it was made at the time of the induction of the individual into army and there is no medical opinion, available for holding that it could not have been detected on medical examination prior to his acceptance into the army. Clause (c) read with Rules 7 & 8 of Entitlement Rules makes the position further clear that for such a disease which is to be accepted as having arisen in service it must also be established that the conditions of military service determined or contributed to the aggravation thereof and that aggravation shall be conceded if causal connection between the disablement and military service is certified by appropriate medical authority. Thus, even in regard to a constitutional disease, if presumption of its having arisen during service is available if medical authority certifies that it bears a causal connection with the military duty then its aggravation by service conditions is to be accepted. 13. After noting the opinion of the Medical Board, the Division Bench ultimately opined that the medical opinion failed to comply with the requirement of regulation 423(c), therefore, rebuttable presumption was not discharged. 14. Applying the ratio of aforesaid decision to another case having similar facts titled Union of India v. Harbans Singh (LPASW No. 16/2010) decided on 30.01.2012 (reported in 2012 Lab IC 3626) the Division Bench of this Court after entering into a detailed discussion with regard to regulations 173 and 423 (c) ultimately dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal flied by the Union of India. 15. In another case of the similar nature, while following the ratio of aforesaid two judgments, the Division Bench of this Court has dismissed LPASW No. 92/2008 preferred by Union of India vide order dated 8th of July, 2012. 16. In the present case, no doubt, the Medical Board has opined that the disability detected was constitutional in nature, yet it has not detailed the reasons which persuaded it to opine that the disease by its nature could not have been detected on medical examination prior to the entrance into army service. 16. In the present case, no doubt, the Medical Board has opined that the disability detected was constitutional in nature, yet it has not detailed the reasons which persuaded it to opine that the disease by its nature could not have been detected on medical examination prior to the entrance into army service. This is against the mandate of Rule 14 (b) to Appendix II of the Pension Regulations for the Army 1961. Thus it is clear that the Medical Board is not only to certify that the disease or disability could not have been detected at the time of entrance, but it has also to give the reasons in support of its opinion, so that the opinion is not in conflict with Rule position. 17. The above discussion apart, let us see whether 'Schizophrenia' (Catatonic), 295 is a genetic disorder and independent of the opinion rendered by the Medical Board. 'Schizophrenia' is a complex mental disorder that makes it difficult to tell the differences between the real and unreal experiences, think logically, have normal emotional response, behave normally in social situation. Certain environmental events can trigger the disease. 'Schizophrenic Psychosis' (Catatonic), 295 may be seen in many mental disorders including infections such as encephalitis, Autoimmune Disorders, Focal Neurological lesions including strokes metabolic disturbances or adverse reaction to prescribed medication. Therefore, this disease cannot be generalized as exclusively genetic or constitutional in nature. In the opinion of experts, the psychological stress plays a significant role in aggravating the disease. Adverse life events can also be responsible for onset of the disease or aggravating the same. The army personnel who are most of the time are away from their family can certainly have this problem. However, it dependents upon an individual case. Therefore, it cannot be categorically said that 'Schizophrenia is always a genetic or constitutional in nature. 18. Adverse life events can also be responsible for onset of the disease or aggravating the same. The army personnel who are most of the time are away from their family can certainly have this problem. However, it dependents upon an individual case. Therefore, it cannot be categorically said that 'Schizophrenia is always a genetic or constitutional in nature. 18. Viewed from that angle also, the Medical Board should have opined by recording valid reasons that the aforesaid disease, of which the petitioner is boarded out, could not have been detected on medical examination prior to the entrance into army service and certifying simply that disease or disability could not have been detected at the time of entrance into army service as constitutional in nature without valid reasons in support of such opinion, in our considered view, could not be a ground available to the Army for boarding the petitioner out of army service. 19. The net result of the aforesaid discussion is that the impugned judgment rendered by learned single Judge in OWP No. 841/1997 granting disability pension to writ petitioner does not suffer from any infirmity on any count warranting our indulgence. Resultantly, the appeal on hand stands dismissed.