- (1.) The appellant joined Indian Army in 1965 and was promoted to the rank of Naib Subedar in 1982 and further to the rank of Subedar in 1983. On 23-2-1985 he was charge-sheeted along with three others for offence under S. 52(a) of the Army Act for committing theft of property belonging to the Government on 3-3-1984. He was tried by the General Court-Martial between 8-3-1985 and 13-7-1985. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and was dismissed from service. The appeal filed by him under S. 164(2) of the Army Act was dismissed. He filed Civil Writ Petition No. 354 of 1989 in the High Court of Delhi on 12-10-1989, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 11-7-1990. The appellant made representation to the President of India on 26-8-1996 under Regulation 113(a) of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 (Part I) for the grant of service pension under exceptional circumstances. He filed Civil Writ Petition No. 16240 of 1997 in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. In the said writ petition the Division Bench of the High Court directed the respondents to consider his representation. The said represenation was rejected on 29-4-1998. Thereafter, the appellant filed Civil Writ Petition No. 14239 of 1998 challenging the action of the respondents rejecting his claim for grant of pension on 2-8-1998. The High Court dismissed the writ petition in limine on 8-9-1998. Hence this appeal.
(2.) We notice the relevant provisions of the Army Act and Regulations :- The Army Act, 1950 "Section 52. Offences in respect of property.- Any person subject to this Act who commits any of the following offences, that is to say,- (a) commits theft of any property belonging to the Government, or to any military, naval or air force mess, band or institution, or to any person subject to military, naval or air force law; or (b) to (f) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ." Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 "Regulation 113(a). An individual who is dismissed under the provisions of the Army Act, is ineligible for pension or gratuity in respect of all previous service. In exceptional cases, however, he may, at the discretion of the President be granted service pension or gratuity at a rate not exceeding that for which he would have otherwise qualified had he been discharged on the same date."
(3.) The submissions made by the learned counsel on either side were on the similar lines that were made in Civil Appeal No. 7805/97 etc.;