OA No. 12 OF 2011. Case: Ex. Gnr (Svyr) Satheesan A. Vs Union of India and Ors.. Armed Forces Tribunal
| Case Number | OA No. 12 OF 2011 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Sri. Ramesh, C.R. and For Respondents: Sri. K.M. Jamaludeen, Sr. Panel Counsel for R1 to R5 |
| Judges | Shri Kant Tripathi, Member (J) and Thomas Mathew, Member (A) |
| Issue | Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007 - Section 14 |
| Judgement Date | March 12, 2013 |
| Court | Armed Forces Tribunal |
Order:
Shri Kant Tripathi, Member (J), (Regional Bench, Kochi)
1. Heard Mr. C.R. Ramesh for the applicant and Mr. K.M. Jamaludeen for the respondents and perused the record. By the instant O.A. filed under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, the applicant has claimed disability pension with effect from 30.11.1996, being the date of discharge.
2. The facts relevant for the decision of the instant O.A. are that, the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 13.8.1987 and was discharged on 1.12.1996 on his own request on extreme compassionate grounds. At the time of discharge, he was found suffering from the disability, "Recurrent Synchopal Attacks (INV) - 72" at 20% for life. More so, the applicant had been kept in low medical category, CEE (P) with effect from 20.12.1995. The Release Medical Board held on 23.4.2002 after the discharge (as per the sanction order, Annexure A14, dated 26th February, 2002) opined that the disability was aggravated due to the physical and mental stress of military service. The applicant's request for disability pension was turned down on the ground that no disability pension was payable in the matter of discharge on own request of the individual. In para 2 of the reply statement, the respondents have stated that all requisite documents pertaining to the disability pension of the applicant had been processed at the IHQ of MOD (Army) vide Artillery Records letter No. 15110204/Pen-2A dated 11th February 2011 for the examination of the case and further direction. The respondents have further submitted that on receipt of the decision of the IHQ of MOD (Army), the matter will be decided accordingly. According to the respondents, the Original Application was premature.
3. In this connection, it may be mentioned that the Bench passed an interim order on 12th December 2012 directing the respondents to take appropriate decision regarding grant of disability pension to the applicant as per the assertions made in para 2 and 3 of the reply statement, and provided one month's time to them. But, despite that, the respondents did not furnish any decision, so we proceed to hear the matter on the merits of the claim.
4. The main defence set up on behalf of the respondents is that no disability pension is payable in the matter of discharge on own request of the individual. In this connection, the respondents relied upon Regulation 178 of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961, Part 1 and the IHQ, MOD (Army letter No. 09201/LMC/GS/Arty. 3 dated 13th December 1973.
5. We had occasion to consider the aforesaid question in O.A. No. 3 of 2012 and has observed as follows in para 4 to para 9 of the order rendered in the said O.A., which may be reproduced as follows:
4. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that no doubt the applicant was discharged on his own request but he had a disability which was aggravated due to the military service, therefore, his request for the disability pension was tenable as per the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Mahavir Singh Narwal v. Union of India and Others (2004 (74) DRJ 661). It was also submitted that the judgment of the Delhi High Court remained in tact even before the Apex Court, as the Special Leave Petition filed by the Union of India and others was dismissed.
5. Regulation 173 of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations'), which deals with the disability pension of P.B.O.Rs, being relevant in the present case, is reproduced as follows:
173. Unless otherwise specifically provided a disability pension consisting of service element and disability element may be granted to an individual who is...
To continue reading
Request your trial