Original Application No. 423 of 2012. Case: Ajai Kumar Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal

Case Number:Original Application No. 423 of 2012
Party Name:Ajai Kumar Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.
Counsel:For Appellant: P.K. Shukla, Advocate and For Respondents: Rajesh Kumar, Learned Counsel
Judges:V.K. Dixit, J. (Member (J)) and Gyan Bhushan, Member (A)
Issue:Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007 - Section 14
Judgement Date:September 17, 2015
Court:Armed Forces Tribunal
 
FREE EXCERPT

Order:

Gyan Bhushan, Member (A), (Regional Bench, Lucknow)

  1. The instant Original Application has been filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, and he has claimed the reliefs as under:--

    (a) To issue/pass an order or direction to the respondents to set-aside/quash the arbitrary order of rejection of disability pension claim passed by PCDA (P) Allahabad on 22 Oct. 1990 as contained in AMC Records letter dated 01 Aug. 2007, annexed as Annexure No A-1 of this original application.

    (b) To issue/pass an order or direction to the respondents to set-aside/quash the arbitrary order of rejection of the first appeal vide IHQ of MoD (Army) letter dated 20 Mar 2008 (received under AMC Records letter dated 17 Apr 2008, as contained in Annexure No A-2 of this original application.

    (c) To issue/pass an order or direction to the respondents to set-aside/quash the arbitrary order of rejection of the second appeal vide IHQ of MoD (Army) letter dated 26 Jun 2012 (received under AMC Records letter dated 29 Jun 2012, as contained in Annexure No A-3 of this original application.

    (d) To issue/pass an order or direction to the respondents to grant disability pension to the applicant from the date of his discharge i.e. 14 May 1990 for life along with relevant interest on the arrears of dues so accrued.

    (e) To issue/pass any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem just, fit and proper under the circumstances of the case in favour of the applicant against the respondents.

    (f) To allow this original application with costs.

  2. The admitted and undisputed facts of the case are that the applicant was enrolled on 22.10.1986 and was invalided out of service on the ground of 'SHIZOFRENIA' with effect from 14.05.1990. Medical Board assessed the disability @ 30% for two years but considered it neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. Claim of the applicant for disability pension was rejected vide letter dated 05.10.1990 (Annexure R-3). The applicant filed a Writ Petition in Lucknow Bench of Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad which was disposed of with the direction that the appeal of the petitioner be decided within a period of six months. In compliance of directions of Hon'ble High Court, appeal of the applicant dated 29.10.1999 was considered by the Appellate committee on first appeal and was rejected. The applicant again filed Writ Petition in the Lucknow Bench of Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. It was dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court on 09.04.2007 as infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the Appellate order. The applicant filed O.A. No. 200 in 2011 which was disposed of by Armed Forces Tribunal on 20.07.2011 with direction to the respondents to decide the applicant's second appeal by a speaking and reasoned order within a period of three months. In compliance with the judgment and order of the Armed Forces Tribunal, second appeal was considered by the Appellate Committee and was rejected. Aggrieved, the applicant filed the instant Original Application.

  3. Heard Shri P.K. Shukla, Learned Counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajesh Kumar, Learned Counsel for the respondents and perused the record.

  4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that at the time of enrolment the applicant was found medically fit and there is no note of any disease at the time of acceptance in military service. Since the onset of the disease was during the military service, the disability has to be considered attributable to and aggravated by military service. Learned Counsel for the applicant placed reliance of judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Dharamvir Singh v. Union of India & Others reported in (2013) 7 SCC 316, and the subsequent judgment of the Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Sukhvinder Singh v. Union of India reported in (2014) STPL (WEF) 468 SC. Learned Counsel for the applicant also made an oral submission that, though not contained in the pleadings, as per Government Order dated 31.01.2001, the disability pension be rounded off to 50%.

  5. Per contra, the Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that duly constituted medical board had assessed the disability as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service and that the disease was considered constitutional disorder and not connected with service conditions. Since the applicant was not fulfilling the primary conditions for grant of disability pension as laid down in Para 173 of Pension Regulations. His claim for disability pension was rejected with an advice to submit an appeal within six months. However the applicant never appealed against the decision of rejection of his disability pension. Narrating the sequence of events as given in the counter affidavit, he submitted that subsequently in compliance with the orders of Hon'ble High Court and Armed Forces Tribunal his first and second appeals against rejection of disability pension were considered and rejected by the competent authority.

  6. Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that precise reason for rejection of disability pension is that the disability was...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL