Dismissed¶8

Union of India & Ors. v. Ex Sgt Manoj Kumar (Service No. 764366)

Delhi HC8 Apr 2025W.P.(C)/14746/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(C) 14746/2024; Delhi HC dismisses Union of India challenge to AFT disability-pension award; Ex Sgt Manoj Kumar (764366); Complex Partial Seizures G-40.2 @20% rounded to 50% for life; Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards 2008; UOI v. Ramavtar CA 418/2012; Dharamavir Singh (2013) 7 SCC 316 (referred); UOI v. Ex Sub Gawas Anil Madso 2025:DHC:2021-DB (relied on); first episode during leave at Hathras; service causation/aggravation upheld; dismissal with costs Rs.15,000/-; pending CM APPL. 61937/2024 infructuous; Navin Chawla & Shalinder Kaur; 08.04.2025.

What did the court decide?

No relief to petitioners: petition dismissed with costs of Rs.15,000/- payable by the petitioners to the respondent; pending application disposed of as rendered infructuous. ¶8

Union of India & Ors. Vs Ex Sgt Manoj Kumar (Service No. 764366) — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to petitioners: petition dismissed with costs of Rs.15,000/- payable by the petitioners to the respondent; pending application disposed of as rendered infructuous.

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent's disability (Complex Partial Seizures G-40.2), first manifesting on 22.06.2014 while he was on leave at his hometown Hathras, was nonetheless attributable to or aggravated by military service conditions. +1 more

¶6

Court's answer

The circumstance that the respondent's first episode occurred while he was on leave and at his native place does not, in any manner, deviate from the fact that the disability occurred or has been aggravated by service conditions.

¶7

Ratio / Principle

Identical submissions to those of the petitioners were earlier considered and rejected by a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Union of India & Ors. v. Ex Sub Gawas Anil Madso, 2025:DHC:2021-DB).

¶4

Key takeaways

Having considered the petitioners' contention that the Tribunal erred in simply placing reliance on the Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards 2008, this court found no merits in the same.ratio¶3
The present petition has no merit and is dismissed, with costs of Rs.15,000/- payable by the petitioners to the respondent; the pending application is disposed of as rendered infructuous.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Navin Chawla & Shalinder Kaur JJ., 08.04.2025) dismissed, with costs of Rs.15,000/- payable to the respondent, W.P.(C) 14746/2024 filed by the Union of India & Ors. challenging the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench order dated 12.09.2023 in OA 1672/2019, whereby Ex Sgt Manoj Kumar (Service No. 764366) was held entitled to disability pension for life qua Complex Partial Seizures G-40.2 @20%, rounded off to 50% for life in terms of UOI & Ors. v. Ramavtar (Civil Appeal No. 418/2012), with a Corrigendum PPO to issue within three months and interest @6% p.a. on unpaid arrears. The court held that the first episode of loss of consciousness (22.06.2014) occurring while the respondent was on leave at his native place Hathras does not detract from service causation/aggravation, the disability having been detected in June 2014 at field station 2WEU(A) and continuing until release on 31.07.2017. Identical submissions had already been rejected by a Coordinate Bench in UOI & Ors. v. Ex Sub Gawas Anil Madso, 2025:DHC:2021-DB. Pending application disposed of as infructuous.

¶1

$~3 (Spl. Bench)

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Date of decision: 08.04.2025

¶4

- W.P.(C) 14746/2024 & CM APPL. 61937/2024 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Ms.Ekta Caoudhary, Ms.Rushali Sikand, Mr.Anand Krishna, Mr.Ayush Kumar, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

EX SGT MANOJ KUMAR (SERVICE NO. 764366)

¶8

.....Respondent

¶9

Through: Ms.Deepika Sheoran, Mr.Ashish Sheoran & Mr.Baljeet Singh, Advs.

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR

¶12

NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)

¶13

This petition has been filed challenging the Order dated 12.09.2023 passed by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Tribunal’) in Original Application (‘OA’) No.1672/2019, titled Ex Sgt Manoj Kumar v. Union of India & Ors , allowing the said OA filed by the respondent herein with the following directions:

¶14

“26. The OA 1672/2019 is thus allowed. The applicant is thus held entitled to the grant of disability pension for life qua the disability of Complex Partial Seizures G-40.2 @20% for life which in terms of the verdict of the Hon'ble

¶15

Signature Not Verified

¶16

Digitally Signed WP(C) 14746/2024 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Da te:1 5.04.2025 19:59:21

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

Supreme Court in UOI & Ors. vs Ramavtar in Civil Appeal No. 418/2012 is rounded off to 50% for life , from the date of discharge. 27. The respondents are thus directed to calculate, sanction and issue the necessary Corrigendum PPO to the applicant within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and the amount of arrears shall be paid by the respondents, failing which the applicant will be entitled for interest @6% p.a. from the date of receipt of a copy of the order by the respondents.”

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Tribunal has erred in simply placing reliance on the Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, to the Armed Forces Personnel 2008, which took effect from 01.01.2008, without appreciating that there is no provision of any presumption being drawn in favour of the respondent therein, as was the case in Dharamavir Singh v. Union of India & Ors. , (2013) 7 SCC 316.

¶20

We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, however, find no merits in the same. 4. Similar submissions have been considered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Union of India & Ors. v. Ex Sub Gawas Anil Madso , 2025:DHC:2021-DB, and rejected.

¶21

Even otherwise, the disability in question was Complex Partial Seizure, which was detected in June, 2014, when the respondent was posted in the field station at 2WEU(A), and continued till his release on 31.07.2017 .

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioners, however, has submitted that the first instance of loss of consciousness was reported by the

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed WP(C) 14746/2024 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Da te:1 5.04.2025 19:59:21

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

respondent on 22.06.2014, when he was on leave and had gone to Hathras, his hometown.

¶27

In our opinion, the said fact would have no bearing on the relief that has been granted to the respondent. Merely because the first episode occurred when the respondent was on leave and at his native place, the same does not, in any manner, deviate from the fact that the disability occurred/has been aggravated by service conditions.

¶28

Accordingly, we find no merit in the present petition. The same is dismissed with costs of Rs.15,000/- to be paid by the petitioners to the respondent. The pending application is also disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

¶29

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

¶30

SHALINDER KAUR, J

¶31

APRIL 8, 2025/Arya/SJ

¶32

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Digitally Signed WP(C) 14746/2024 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Da te:1 5.04.2025 19:59:21

¶35

Page 3 of 3

Union of India & Ors. v. Ex Sgt Manoj Kumar (Service No. 764366)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India & Ors. v. Ex Sgt Manoj Kumar (Service No. 764366)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Sunita Popli Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Gaurav Meena Vs Central Information Commission

K.G.Somani & Co. Vs UOI & Ors.

Mohd Murtaza Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Bushra for on Behalf of Aman Gul Vs Union of India, & Ors.

Ms New Gold Star Enterprises Vs the Commissioner Dsgst & Anr.

Assise Thankappan Vs Magic Bus India Foundation & Ors.

Jfc Finance India Limited Vs Arvind Garg Liquidator & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Lt Col Amrish Man Gurung Retd

Mohd. Saleem Khan Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Comdt Raj Kumar Arora Vs Union of India and Anr.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Nk Nanak Chand Retd

Union of India & Ors. Vs Cdr Pyare Lal (Retd)

Union of India and Ors. Vs Bathula Rajesh Mcaa II Retd