- (1.) HEARD Counsel for the parties. Petitioner has sought more compensation on account of 75% disability incurred by him during the course of his duty in Kargil Area while posted under the respondent Border Security Force in the year 1995.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner has stated that another person contable T. Kujur who has sustained 75% disablement, was granted compensation of Rs. 11,00,556.00 while a sum of Rs. 5,37,960.00 was paid to the petitioner for his disability, although T. Kujur was declared 65% disabled. The respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavit in which they have furnished a chart at Paragraph 5 (VI) giving particulars of the petitioner as well as the constable T. Kujur as to the pay drawn by them on the date of the Medical Board, percentage of disability on the date of medical examination, disability pension for 100% disability, the amount admissible for disability, commutation factor and the final calculation of compensation. It is submitted on behalf of the respondents that while the petitioner was assessed as suffering from 75% disability on the date of the Medical Board, whereas constable T. Kujur was suffering from 100% disability on the date of the Medical Board held on 24th November, 2004. As per the formula uniformally applied, calculation of compensation of the petitioner comes to Rs. 5,37,966.00 while in respect of other person comes to Rs. 11,00,556.00.
(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner however, has assailed the calculation of the compensation by the respondents by alleging that the other person was only 65% disabled but has been shown to be 100% disabled.;