Dismissed

Joseph Justin v. Union of India

Kerala HC20 Jan 2009OP/16564/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a writ petition seeking disability pension filed 33 years after discharge from service. It held that the petitioner's claim was barred by unexplained delay and laches, noting that relevant documents had been destroyed and referencing prior judgments rejecting similar delayed claims.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's request for direction to pay disability pension and other reliefs were dismissed.

Joseph Justin Vs Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2009 / 30TH POUSHA 1930

¶4

OP.No. 16564 of 2001(V)

PETITIONER(S):

JOSEPH JUSTIN, COCHU POIKA HOUSE, P.O. PADAPPAKKARA, (VIA) MULAVANA, QUILON, KERALA.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.N.VIMALAN SRI.BIJU M.JOHN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

¶12

UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI.

¶13

THE CHIEF CONTROLLER OF DEFENCE ACCOUNTS (PENSION), AIR FORCE CELL, ALLAHABAD.

¶14

THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF DEFENCE ACCOUNTS, WEST BLOCK NO. 5, R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI.

¶15

THE OFFICER IN CHARGE, AIR FORCE RECORD OFFICE, SUBROTO PARK, NEW DELHI-110 010.

¶16

ADV. SRI.JOHN VARGHESE, ASSISTANT SG FOR R1 TO R4 SRI.P.S.BIJU, ADDL.CGSC FOR R.1TO4

¶17

THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: O.P.NO. 16564/2001.

¶19

EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE DT. 21-10-1972.

¶20

EXT.P2 LETTER DT. 22-9-1999.

¶21

EXT.P3 REPRESENTATION DT. 20-1-2000.

¶22

EXT.P4 LETTER DT. 22-3-2000.

¶23

EXT.P5 LETTER DT. 25-5-2000.

¶24

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶25

EXT.R1 JUDGMENT OF DELHI HIGH COURT IN CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7849/2004 DT. 17-5-2004.

¶26

EXT.R2 JUDGMENT IN W.P.C.NO. 17329/2005.

¶27

EXT.R3 JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO. 2402/2005.

[TRUE COPY]

P.S TO JUDGE.

S. Siri Jagan, J.

O.P. No. 16564 of 2001

¶32

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶33

Dated this, the 20^th January, 2009.

¶34

The petitioner who entered Indian Air Force on 24-6-1963 was discharged from service on being found medically unfit for further service. Petitioner's request for disability pension was rejected by Ext. P4 order dated 22-3-2000. The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to pay to the petitioner disability pension with effect from 1-11-1966, which is the date of his discharge from the Air Force. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶35

“(a) To call for the records connect with this case;

¶36

(b) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order commanding respondents herein to grant disability pension to the petitioner with effect from 1-11-1966, the date of his discharge from Air Force Service under the Rules.”

¶37

I have heard the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶38

The petitioner filed the application for pension 33 years after his discharge from service. The same has been rejected by Ext. P4 stating thus:

¶39

“You were medically boarded out for the disease “SCHIZOPHRENIA” on 01 Nov. 1966. The disease for which you have been invalided out has not been accepted as attributable to or aggravated by the service. Accordingly, your claim for disability pension was rejected by the pension Sanctioning Authority i.e. CCDA (P), Allahabad and the same was intimated to you.

¶40

It can be seen that almost 33 years have been elapsed from the date of your discharge and relevant documents have been destroyed after their retention for a stipulated period of 25 years. With little information available with this office it is learned that your representations have been replied by this office.”

¶41

The respondents cannot be expected to retain the service

¶42

O.P No. 16564/2001. -: 2 :-

¶43

records of the petitioner for 33 years. As such, the petitioner is guilty of delay and laches. In fact, in somewhat similar circumstances, on the ground of delay, similar claim has been rejected by this Court in W.P(C) No. 17329/2005 by Ext. R2 judgment, which was confirmed by the Division Bench in Ext. R3 judgment. In the said circumstances, following those judgments, I hold that the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for in this original petition on account of unexplained delay and laches for 33 years. Accordingly, the original petition is dismissed.

¶44

Tds/

Joseph Justin v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joseph Justin v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalu.C.K. Vs Parameswaran

Jose Ellickal Vs the Registrar of Births & Deaths

Haridas R. Vs K.S.R.T.C. and Another

Maimoona Vs the Intelligence Officer

V.S.Manjari Vs State of Kerala

Blue Mountain Biscuit Vs Sales Tax Officer