submissions by relying upon the provisions of Rules referred to above, particularly, Rules 2002 amended in 2010 advising the Medical Officers to comply with the military pension rules which cannot be considered to be final, as it had to be subjected to the satisfaction of sanctioning authority. Orders passed in the first and second appeals are stereotype/mechanical manner and there is no application of mind. As far as the W.P(C) No.43207 is concerned, at the time of examination, the medical disability was found to be 'attributable to service' but without giving any opportunity of hearing or re-examination it was changed to be 'not attributable to service'. Such dichotomous approach is not permissible in the eyes of law. In support of the contentions, relied upon the judgment of Dharamvir Singh v. Union of India and Others (2013) 7 SCC 316 and Union of India v. Angad Singh Titaria (AIR 2015 SC 1898) . The aforementioned judgments are based on Rule 14 of the entitlement Rules as well as Para 423 (a), (c) and (d) of the Medical Officers Military Pension Rules, 2002. The 1982 Rules, in such circumstances, cannot be taken into consideration for effectual and proper adjudication of the controversy. Even in the 1982 Rules also, there is a presumption of sufferance of a disability, attributable to or aggravated to the service. Union of India had not taken consistent stand, much less the Central Administrative Tribunal, whereas in the