Dismissed

Union of India and Ors. v. Baljit Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Jul 2010LPA/433/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeals, the High Court upheld the lower court's order dismissing the Union of India's appeal. The Court held that an Army officer injured during service is entitled to a disability pension regardless of subsequent administrative discharge, following precedent.

What did the court decide?

appeal dismissed confirming that the enrolled officer is entitled to disability pension despite administrative discharge.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Baljit… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

LPA No. 433 of 2010 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

LPA No. of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision 27 .7.2010

Union of India

... Appellant

Versus

Ex. Sep. Baljit Singh

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL

¶11

Present: Ms. Geeta Singhwal ,Advocate for the appellant

¶12

1.To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

¶13

2.Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ?

¶14

M.M.KUMAR, J.

¶15

The instant appeal filed by the Union of India under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgement dated 16.9.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court while allowing the writ petition of the petitioner- respondent. The question of law considered by the learned Single Judge is whether the physical injury suffered during the service leading to various diseases and down grading of medical category CEE would entitle an enrolled officer to claim disability pension although he has been discharged on administrative grounds. The counsel for the appellant as well as for the petitioner had agreed before the learned Single Judge that the controversy was covered by the judgement of this Court rendered in the case of Jaggar Singh v. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15227 of 2007 decided on 11.5.2009).The writ petitioner- respondent was enrolled in the Army on 4.10.1990 and he completed his training successfully. He suffered physical injury which ultimately resulted in sufferance of various diseases.

¶16

LPA No. 433 of 2010 (O&M) 2

¶17

Accordingly, he was degraded to medical category CEE and was discharged on the ground that he has become undesirable and his services were no longer required. He was not brought before the Release Medical Board and he remained missing from 1995 and could be found only in the year 2002. His representation for grant of disability pension was rejected by the appellants and the order was challenged before the learned Single Judge.

¶18

Having heard the learned counsel we are of the considered view that an injury suffered by the Army Officer during service would be imputable to military service and therefore it would bring him entitlement to disability pension irrespective of the fact whether he has been discharged on administrative grounds on a later date. The matter is covered in favour of the petitioner- respondent by a judgement in the case Jaggar Singh (supra) and it was conceded before the learned Single Judge by the counsel for the appellant. Accordingly, we find that there is no room to interfere in the view taken by the learned Single Judge. The appeal is wholly without merit and the same is dismissed.

¶19

(M.M.Kumar) Judge

¶20

(A. N. Jindal ) 27.7.2010 Judge

¶21

okg

Union of India and Ors. v. Baljit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India and Ors. v. Baljit Singh

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

Kurukshetra University Vs Rajni Joshi and Ors.

Baldev Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Cat, Chd.

Avtar Singh etc. Vs the Special Secy.Coop.Appeals Pb.

Santokh Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Sukhwinder Singh