EX. HAV. GOVIND RAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Ex. Hav. Govind Ram
UNION OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
NIRMAL SINGH, J. -
(1.) PETITIONER was enrolled in the army on 22nd April'69 and successfully completed the military training. He was then promoted to the rank of Havildar w.e.f. 1st Jan 83. Petitioner was invalidated out of service in low medical category EEE w.e.f. 2nd Nov'88. The Invaliding Medical Board assessed the disability of the petitioner at 40%. Petitioner preferred his claim for disability pension but the respondents allowed the disability at 20% instead of 40% in medical category EEE. The grievance of the petitioner is that he represented before the respondents for considering his claim regarding grant of disability pension as per the assessment made by the Invaliding Medical Board but no action was taken by respondents.
(2.) ON notice, respondents have filed counter in which they have admitted that the petitioner was invalidated out -of service being a low -medical category EEE w.e.f. 3rd Nov'88, under Army Rule 13(3) item III (iii) due invaliding disability 'Lumbar Canal Stenosis (OPTD)' and the Invaliding Medical Board assessed the disability of the petitioner at 40% but according to para 17(a)(ii) of Entitlement Rules as amended by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence Corrigendum No. 1(1)81/D(Pen -C) dated 21st June'96, the Medical Advisor (Pension) attached to the office of Chief Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension), Allahabad, after due consideration assessed the disability at 20% and the petitioner was granted disability pension accordingly in addition to the service pension.
I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. There is no dispute that the Invaliding Medical Board assessed the disability of the petitioner at 40% in low Medical Category 'EEE' Petitioner was boarded out of service on 2nd Nov'88, In para 8 of the petition, the petitioner has pleaded as under:
8. That thereafter the petitioner was subjected to again resurvey medical board on 08.08.2001 which assessed 10% increase of the existing disability since last medical board as such the disability in respect of the petitioner due to Lumber Canal Stenosis is 50% in cat. EEE since the last medical board.
(3.) RESPONDENTS have placed on record the Medical Board proceedings with regard to the assessment of the disability of the petitioner. Under the column 'Percentage of disablement', the assessment has been made as 40%, however, the Pension sanctioning authority i.e. Chief CDA(P), Allahabad, has allowed the disability pension at 20%. At the hearing when it was pointed out to the learned Counsel for Union of India as to on what basis, this assessment has been decreased from 40% to 20%, and whether the petitioner was re -examined/re -surveyed by the Medical Board, he very fairly and candidly made a statement that no such re -survey has been conducted but this decrease in assessment of disability of the petitioner has been done on the basis of the corrigendum referred to above.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.