H.R. Panwar, J. - (1.) BY the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the orders Annex.P -2 dated 22.06.1990, Annex.P -5 dated 10.01.2005 and Annex.P -6 dated 28.02.2005 and a direction to the respondents to grant him disability pension w.e.f. 25.07.1989 when he was invalided out from service.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts and circumstances of the case which are relevant and necessary for the decision of this writ petition are that the petitioner was recruited in Indian Navy on 04.02.1985 after thorough medical examination by the Medical authorities of the Navy, he was found medically fit in medical category "AYE" and at the time of his recruitment he was not suffering from any disease or disability. On being medically examined by the medical authorities of the Navy at the time of recruitment, his vision was 6/6 of both the eyes. The petitioner while in service and performing the Naval duties, suffered Retinitis Pegmentosa and was examined by the Medical Board of respondent after having rendered satisfactory services of over four years and five months he was discharged on 30.05.1989 vide Annex.P -1 on medical ground. According to the petitioner, the petitioner suffered from the disease Retinitis Pegmentosa while performing the naval duties and therefore, the disease for which the petitioner has been discharged and invalidated was attributable and aggravated by naval services. The disability suffered by the petitioner while in naval services has been assessed to 80% arising out of and during the course of his employment with the Indian Navy and was directly attributable to the naval services. However, the disability of the petitioner has increased after his invalidment from Indian Navy. By the instant writ petition, a challenge has been made by the petitioner to the denial of disability pension to him. A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondents stating therein that the disability suffered by the petitioner was neither attributable to nor aggravated by the naval services and therefore, the competent authority rejected the claim of the petitioner for disability pension vide its order dated 29.05.1990 and the same was communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 22.06.1990 Annex.R/1. According to the respondents, Regulation 101 of the Navy (Pension) Regulations, 1964 read with the provisions of para 7.2 of the Government of India letter dated 31.1.2001, the disability pension may be granted to a person who is invalidated out from the service on account of disability which is attributable to or aggravated by naval service. According to the respondents, para 6 of Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Award, 1982 (for short the Rules of 1982 hereinafter) provides that the disablement shall be accepted as due to military service when it is certified by appropriate medical authority that the same is due to a wound, injury or disease which is attributable to military service or existed before or arose during military service and has been and remains aggravated thereby. According to the respondents since the petitioner was not entitled for disability pension and therefore, the benefits admissible to him i.e. invalid gratuity amounting to Rs. 4240A was paid to the petitioner.
(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.;