Swatanter Kumar, J. - (1.) THE petitioner who was granted permanent commission in the Indian Army on 3.6.1956 as an officer in Artillery Regiment, has filed this petition praying that the respondents be commanded by a writ of Mandamus to grant to the petitioner disability pension computed at 30% disability as recommended by the Medical Board. The petitioner served the Indian Army for a considerable period and was promoted to the rank of Major General in May, 1987. On 30.6.1992 petitioner was invalided/released from Army service in furtherance of the recommendations of the Release Medical Board held in April, 1992, which declared the petitioner to be suffering from 20% disability attributable to Military Service. In August, 1995, the petitioner was subjected to Re -Survey Medical Board, where his disability was increased to 30%, attributable to Army Service. The petitioner earlier also filed a Civil Writ Petition No. 10112 of 1998, which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh one, as matter was pending consideration before the Army authorities. However, vide order dated 4.1.1999, the petitioner was informed by the respondents that his disability has been assessed at 20% and he was granted life disability pension on that basis.
(2.) AS is evident from the above narrated facts, the whole case of the petitioner is based on the averment that the Re -Survey Medical Board, to which the petitioner was subjected to, in August, 1995, had declared petitioner's disability to be 30% instead of 20% which was assessed at the initial stage of release of the petitioner. This fact is disputed by the respondents in the written statement filed on record. Keeping in view the above controversy, the respondents were directed to produce the record of the Re -Survey Medical Board which was held in fact on 27.7.1995. The records were produced in Court. Photo -copy of the proceedings of the Re -Survey Medical Board as well as the pay slips were placed on record. It is clear from the record that Graded Specialist Sqn. Ldr. Ajay Kumar, after noticing the details about the petitioner, had recommended as under : - "Disability to be increased to 30%." In view of these observations of the Graded Specialist, the competent authority had observed : - "In view of the above the officer is brought before the Medical Board." The findings of the medical board as recorded on 25.7.1995, in regard to disability, read as under : - "15. Disability(ies) which the original invalid -ing/pre -release medical board found to be present. BILATERAL SENSORINDURAL HEARING, 389, V -67. 16, Previous assessment(s) of disablement: Disability(ies) Percentage (in words) of assessment Bilateral Sensorinodural Hearing 1000,389, V -67. 20%
(3.) IT is clear from the above findings that the disability of the petitioner was never increased to 30% as alleged. The Re -Survey Medical Board maintained the disability at 20% and the petitioner was already getting disability pension on that basis. Thus, no change or increase in the pension was called for. It may be noticed that on 27.7.1995, the petitioner himself had recorded in paragraph No. 1 of the Medical Board proceedings that he was enjoying good health and when he was examined by the specialist, loss of hearing was considered normal deterioration owing to earlier disability. As the very foundation of the case of the petitioner is factually incorrect, this Court cannot grant to the petitioner any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, however, without any order as to costs.;