jyana devi's pension writ petition
Post on 10-Apr-2015
253 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Disability Pension MatterDisability Pension Matter
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHANIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPURAT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition NoS.B. Civil Writ Petition No……………………….…...……………….…...…………………………….…...……………….…...……/2009/2009
Smt. Jyana Devi aged about 75 years, widow ofSmt. Jyana Devi aged about 75 years, widow of
Ex-Rfn No. 2078 Late Shri Jagna Ram Resident ofEx-Rfn No. 2078 Late Shri Jagna Ram Resident of
Vill. Marot P.o. Islampur, via Baggar, Tehsil &Vill. Marot P.o. Islampur, via Baggar, Tehsil &
District- Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. P.I.N. – 333001. District- Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. P.I.N. – 333001.
………… PetitionerPetitioner
VersusVersus
1.1. The Union of India through the Secretary, MinistryThe Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry
of Defence, Government of India, New Delhi –of Defence, Government of India, New Delhi –
110011.110011.
2.2. The Chief of the Army Staff, Army Headquarters,The Chief of the Army Staff, Army Headquarters,
New Delhi -110011.New Delhi -110011.
3.3. The Controller General of Defence AccountsThe Controller General of Defence Accounts
(Pension),West Block -5 R.K. Puram, New Delhi –(Pension),West Block -5 R.K. Puram, New Delhi –
110066110066
4.4. The Principal Controller of Defence AccountsThe Principal Controller of Defence Accounts
(Pension), Draupadi Ghaat, Allahabad – 211014.(Pension), Draupadi Ghaat, Allahabad – 211014.
5.5. The Officer – in – Charge, RAJ RIF RegimentThe Officer – in – Charge, RAJ RIF Regiment
Abhilekh Karyaylaya (Records) Delhi Cantt. - 10Abhilekh Karyaylaya (Records) Delhi Cantt. - 10
……Non- ……Non-
Petitioners.Petitioners.
1
S.B. Civil writ petition under Article 226 ofS.B. Civil writ petition under Article 226 of
The Constitution of India,The Constitution of India,
AndAnd
IN THE MATTER OF:IN THE MATTER OF:
Articles 14, 16, 21, 39 (c), 41, 43 (3)Articles 14, 16, 21, 39 (c), 41, 43 (3)
And 300 A of the Constitution of India,And 300 A of the Constitution of India,
AndAnd
IN THE MATTER OF:IN THE MATTER OF:
Principles of Natural Justice,Principles of Natural Justice,
And And
IN THE MATTER OF:IN THE MATTER OF:
Army Pension Regulations, 1961.Army Pension Regulations, 1961.
And And
IN THE MATTER OF:IN THE MATTER OF:
Grant of disability pension to the petitioner.Grant of disability pension to the petitioner.
To.To.
The Hon’ ble Vacation JudgeThe Hon’ ble Vacation Judge
Mr. and HislordshipsMr. and Hislordships
other companion Judges of the High Courtother companion Judges of the High Court
of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Benchof Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench
at Jaipur.at Jaipur.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS:-MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS:-
The humble petitioner, above named,The humble petitioner, above named,
most respectfully begs to submit as under:- most respectfully begs to submit as under:-
1.1. That petitioner is a citizen of India she is widow of Ex-Rfn No. 2078 late shriThat petitioner is a citizen of India she is widow of Ex-Rfn No. 2078 late shri
Jagna Ram who was a soldier of Indian Army, he was discharged from theJagna Ram who was a soldier of Indian Army, he was discharged from the
service of armed forces of the country on account of war injury atservice of armed forces of the country on account of war injury at
Nasirabad in lower medical category and became entitled for the disabilityNasirabad in lower medical category and became entitled for the disability
pension i.e. War Injury Pension (WIP) under framework of the constitutionpension i.e. War Injury Pension (WIP) under framework of the constitution
of India but letter on it was discontinued permanently. Writ Petitioner isof India but letter on it was discontinued permanently. Writ Petitioner is
permanent inhabitant within jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court hence she ispermanent inhabitant within jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court hence she is
2
entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court forentitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court for
redressal of her grievances by way of filing this writ petition.redressal of her grievances by way of filing this writ petition.
2.2. That husband of the petitioner was enrolled in Rajputana Rifles (for shortThat husband of the petitioner was enrolled in Rajputana Rifles (for short
RAJRIF) of Indian Army on 20-5-1942 and on account of the war injuryRAJRIF) of Indian Army on 20-5-1942 and on account of the war injury
during the out break of Second World War he was invalided out from theduring the out break of Second World War he was invalided out from the
Indian Army on 4-10-1945. He was granted disability pension /War InjuryIndian Army on 4-10-1945. He was granted disability pension /War Injury
Pension (for short WIP) which was drawn by him up to 8 February 1956.Pension (for short WIP) which was drawn by him up to 8 February 1956.
On account of seriousness of his injuries he expired on 2-9-1998 at BDKOn account of seriousness of his injuries he expired on 2-9-1998 at BDK
Government Hospital Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. He used to draw pensionGovernment Hospital Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. He used to draw pension
through PPM Team of Jaipur, Subsequently re-designated as DPDO,through PPM Team of Jaipur, Subsequently re-designated as DPDO,
Jaipur. The husband of the petitioner had drawn full pension up to 8-2-Jaipur. The husband of the petitioner had drawn full pension up to 8-2-
1956. A Photostat copy of the discharge certificate is being filed here with1956. A Photostat copy of the discharge certificate is being filed here with
and marked as and marked as Annexure -1Annexure -1 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
3.3. That on 14 Sept. 98 record officer forwarded a letter to the base HospitalThat on 14 Sept. 98 record officer forwarded a letter to the base Hospital
Delhi Cantt. wherein it was mentioned that disability was increased in 1967Delhi Cantt. wherein it was mentioned that disability was increased in 1967
substantially and the husband of the petitioner had claimed for the disabilitysubstantially and the husband of the petitioner had claimed for the disability
pension. A Photostat copy of the letter of the record officer of RARIF datedpension. A Photostat copy of the letter of the record officer of RARIF dated
14-09-1998 is being filed here with and marked as 14-09-1998 is being filed here with and marked as Annexure -2Annexure -2 of the writ of the writ
petition.petition.
4.4. That Supreme Lal an advocate having office at New Delhi forwarded theThat Supreme Lal an advocate having office at New Delhi forwarded the
grievances of the husband of the petitioner in his legal notice he narratedgrievances of the husband of the petitioner in his legal notice he narrated
that his client was granted disability pension in the year 1945 which remainthat his client was granted disability pension in the year 1945 which remain
continued up to 1956 more than ten years, A Photostat copy of thecontinued up to 1956 more than ten years, A Photostat copy of the
counsels legal Notice dated 05-11-1997 is being filed here with and markedcounsels legal Notice dated 05-11-1997 is being filed here with and marked
as as Annexure -3Annexure -3 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
5.5. That petitioners husband died on account of critical condition of his warThat petitioners husband died on account of critical condition of his war
injury in BDK Hospital Jhunjhunu on 2.09.1998 A Photostat copy of theinjury in BDK Hospital Jhunjhunu on 2.09.1998 A Photostat copy of the
3
death certificate issued by the registrar of death dated 12-09-1998 is beingdeath certificate issued by the registrar of death dated 12-09-1998 is being
filed here with and marked as filed here with and marked as Annexure -4Annexure -4 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
6.6. That petitioner moved a representation to the Minister of Defence Govt. ofThat petitioner moved a representation to the Minister of Defence Govt. of
India on 4-9-2000 where in she submitted that petitioner’s husband wasIndia on 4-9-2000 where in she submitted that petitioner’s husband was
granted disability pension on account of war injury on 4.10.1945 whichgranted disability pension on account of war injury on 4.10.1945 which
remain continued by 8-2-1956 more than 10 year. Her husband wasremain continued by 8-2-1956 more than 10 year. Her husband was
suffering from the war injury and also died due to the seriousness of thesuffering from the war injury and also died due to the seriousness of the
war injury; on the other hand the authorities calculated his disability lesswar injury; on the other hand the authorities calculated his disability less
than 20 percent in an arbitrary manner and ceased the disability pension.than 20 percent in an arbitrary manner and ceased the disability pension.
A Photostatted copy of the representation dated 4-9-2000 is being filedA Photostatted copy of the representation dated 4-9-2000 is being filed
here with and marked as here with and marked as Annexure -5Annexure -5 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
7.7. That records officer of RAJRIF informed the petitioner that the record of theThat records officer of RAJRIF informed the petitioner that the record of the
unit has been burned out long back, further it was also intimated that at theunit has been burned out long back, further it was also intimated that at the
time of death petitioners husband was not drawing any pension thereforetime of death petitioners husband was not drawing any pension therefore
she can not claim for the family pension, he further advised to the petitionershe can not claim for the family pension, he further advised to the petitioner
for making a request to the officials of the state Govt for financialfor making a request to the officials of the state Govt for financial
assistance to the war widows. A Photostatted copy of the letter datedassistance to the war widows. A Photostatted copy of the letter dated
19.06.2004 issued by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this19.06.2004 issued by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this
effect is being filed here with and marked as effect is being filed here with and marked as Annexure -6Annexure -6 of the writ of the writ
petition.petition.
8.8. That on 9.02.2004 Secretary of the District Soldier Board JhunjhunuThat on 9.02.2004 Secretary of the District Soldier Board Jhunjhunu
forwarded the representation made by the petitioner to the records officerforwarded the representation made by the petitioner to the records officer
of the RAJRIF wherein the claim of the disability as well as service elementof the RAJRIF wherein the claim of the disability as well as service element
pension was forwarded to the records officer of RAJRIF. A Photostattedpension was forwarded to the records officer of RAJRIF. A Photostatted
copy of the forwarding letter dated 9.02.2004 issued by the Secretary ofcopy of the forwarding letter dated 9.02.2004 issued by the Secretary of
the District Soldier Board Jhunjhunu as to this effect is being filed herethe District Soldier Board Jhunjhunu as to this effect is being filed here
with and marked as with and marked as Annexure -7Annexure -7 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
4
9.9. That on 22That on 22ndnd April, 2004 records officer of RAJRIF informed that until the April, 2004 records officer of RAJRIF informed that until the
documents sought by the record office is not provided; it would not bedocuments sought by the record office is not provided; it would not be
possible to proceed in the matter of pension case of the petitioner. Apossible to proceed in the matter of pension case of the petitioner. A
Photostatted copy of the letter dated 22Photostatted copy of the letter dated 22ndnd April, 2004 issued by the records April, 2004 issued by the records
officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filed here with andofficer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filed here with and
marked as marked as Annexure -8Annexure -8 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
10.10. That on 16That on 16thth August, 2004 C.G.D.A. New Delhi Informed to the senior August, 2004 C.G.D.A. New Delhi Informed to the senior
records officer of the RAJRIF that the matter of family pension may kindlyrecords officer of the RAJRIF that the matter of family pension may kindly
be looked in to and required documents may kindly be furnished to thebe looked in to and required documents may kindly be furnished to the
office of the record of RAJRIF. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 16office of the record of RAJRIF. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 16 thth
August, 2004 issued by the C.G.D.A. New Delhi to the records officer of theAugust, 2004 issued by the C.G.D.A. New Delhi to the records officer of the
Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filed here with and marked asRajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filed here with and marked as
Annexure -9Annexure -9 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
11.11. That again on 6That again on 6thth May, 2005 the records officer of Rajrif reiterated to the May, 2005 the records officer of Rajrif reiterated to the
petitioner that at the time of death petitioners husband was not drawing anypetitioner that at the time of death petitioners husband was not drawing any
pension therefore she does not have any claim for the family pension, hepension therefore she does not have any claim for the family pension, he
further advised to the petitioner for making a request to the officials of thefurther advised to the petitioner for making a request to the officials of the
state Govt to apply for the financial aid to the widows of the ex-servicemenstate Govt to apply for the financial aid to the widows of the ex-servicemen
as well as war widows. A Photostatted copy of the letter dated 6th May,as well as war widows. A Photostatted copy of the letter dated 6th May,
2005 issued by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect2005 issued by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect
is being filed here with and marked as is being filed here with and marked as Annexure -10Annexure -10 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
12.12. That again on 8That again on 8thth January 2006 the records officer of Rajrif again asked for January 2006 the records officer of Rajrif again asked for
the submission of the documents for consideration of the pension to thethe submission of the documents for consideration of the pension to the
petitioner, he further informed that in case she fails to submit the requiredpetitioner, he further informed that in case she fails to submit the required
documents with in thirty days her case will be closed. A Photostatted copydocuments with in thirty days her case will be closed. A Photostatted copy
of the letter dated 8th January, 2006 issued by the records officer of theof the letter dated 8th January, 2006 issued by the records officer of the
Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filed here with and marked asRajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filed here with and marked as
Annexure -11Annexure -11 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
5
13.13. That again on 4That again on 4thth April, 2006 the records officer of the RAJRIF again asked April, 2006 the records officer of the RAJRIF again asked
for the submission of the LTA certificate for consideration of the case offor the submission of the LTA certificate for consideration of the case of
family pension of the petitioner, he further informed that as earliest asfamily pension of the petitioner, he further informed that as earliest as
possible the LTA certificate be provided thereof and thereby the case maypossible the LTA certificate be provided thereof and thereby the case may
be proceeded. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 4be proceeded. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 4 thth April, 2006 issued April, 2006 issued
by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filedby the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filed
here with and marked as here with and marked as Annexure -12Annexure -12 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
14.14. That on 16-05-2006 petitioner made a request that her husband wasThat on 16-05-2006 petitioner made a request that her husband was
drawing pension from DPDO Jaipur office in case LTA certificate isdrawing pension from DPDO Jaipur office in case LTA certificate is
essential it may be obtained from the said office. In case it is not possibleessential it may be obtained from the said office. In case it is not possible
to obtain it from the office of DPDO Jaipur, it may kindly be dispensed with.to obtain it from the office of DPDO Jaipur, it may kindly be dispensed with.
A Photostat copy of the letter dated 16.05.2006 submitted by the petitionerA Photostat copy of the letter dated 16.05.2006 submitted by the petitioner
as to this effect is being filed here with and marked as as to this effect is being filed here with and marked as Annexure -13Annexure -13 of the of the
writ petition.writ petition.
15.15. That again on 1That again on 1stst November, 2006 the records officer of Rajrif informed that November, 2006 the records officer of Rajrif informed that
the claim has been returned by PCDA(P) Allahabad, he again asked for thethe claim has been returned by PCDA(P) Allahabad, he again asked for the
submission of the LTA certificate for consideration of the case of familysubmission of the LTA certificate for consideration of the case of family
pension of the petitioner, he further informed that as earliest as possiblepension of the petitioner, he further informed that as earliest as possible
the LTA certificate be provided thereof and thereby the case may bethe LTA certificate be provided thereof and thereby the case may be
proceeded. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 1proceeded. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 1stst November, 2006 issued November, 2006 issued
by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filedby the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is being filed
here with and marked as here with and marked as Annexure -14Annexure -14 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
16.16. That again on 1That again on 1stst December, 2006 the records officer of Rajrif informed December, 2006 the records officer of Rajrif informed
again that the claim has been returned by PCDA(P) Allahabad, he againagain that the claim has been returned by PCDA(P) Allahabad, he again
asked for the submission of the LTA certificate for consideration of the caseasked for the submission of the LTA certificate for consideration of the case
of family pension of the petitioner, he further informed that as earliest asof family pension of the petitioner, he further informed that as earliest as
possible the LTA certificate be provided thereof and thereby the case maypossible the LTA certificate be provided thereof and thereby the case may
be proceeded. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 1be proceeded. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 1 stst December, 2006 December, 2006
6
issued by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect isissued by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is
being filed here with and marked as being filed here with and marked as Annexure -15Annexure -15 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
17.17. That again on 19That again on 19thth December, 2007 the records officer of Rajrif informed December, 2007 the records officer of Rajrif informed
again that the claim has been returned by PCDA(P) Allahabad, he againagain that the claim has been returned by PCDA(P) Allahabad, he again
asked for the submission of the LTA certificate for consideration of the caseasked for the submission of the LTA certificate for consideration of the case
of family pension of the petitioner, he further informed that as earliest asof family pension of the petitioner, he further informed that as earliest as
possible the LTA certificate be provided thereof and thereby the case maypossible the LTA certificate be provided thereof and thereby the case may
be proceeded. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 19be proceeded. A Photostat copy of the letter dated 19 thth December, 2007 December, 2007
issued by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect isissued by the records officer of the Rajputana Rifles as to this effect is
being filed here with and marked as being filed here with and marked as Annexure -16Annexure -16 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
18.18. That in the mean time petitioner submitted an affidavit wherein sheThat in the mean time petitioner submitted an affidavit wherein she
narrated that her husband was drawing pension from DPDO, Jaipur, Shenarrated that her husband was drawing pension from DPDO, Jaipur, She
has not got married again after the death of her husband. A Photostat copyhas not got married again after the death of her husband. A Photostat copy
of the affidavit dated 17.11.2006 duly attested by the Executive Magistrateof the affidavit dated 17.11.2006 duly attested by the Executive Magistrate
as to this effect is being filed here with and marked as as to this effect is being filed here with and marked as Annexure -17Annexure -17 of the of the
writ petition.writ petition.
19.19. That the relevant rules from the Pension Regulations for the Army Part IThat the relevant rules from the Pension Regulations for the Army Part I
are being reproduced for the ready reference of this Hon’ ble Court asare being reproduced for the ready reference of this Hon’ ble Court as
herein after :-herein after :-
REGULATIONSREGULATIONS 173 - 173 - Unless otherwise specifically provided, a disabilityUnless otherwise specifically provided, a disability
pension may be granted to an individual who is invalided from service onpension may be granted to an individual who is invalided from service on
account of a disability which is attributable to or aggravated by militaryaccount of a disability which is attributable to or aggravated by military
service & is assessed at 20 per cent or over.service & is assessed at 20 per cent or over.
The question whether a disability is attributable to or aggravated by militaryThe question whether a disability is attributable to or aggravated by military
service shall be determined under the rules in Appendix – II.service shall be determined under the rules in Appendix – II.
APPENDIX IIAPPENDIX II
7
RuleRule -1-1 An individual who at the time of his release under theAn individual who at the time of his release under the
Release Regulations is in a lower medical category that in which he wasRelease Regulations is in a lower medical category that in which he was
recruited will be treated as invalided from service.recruited will be treated as invalided from service.
RuleRule -4 -4 In deciding on the issue of entitlement all theIn deciding on the issue of entitlement all the
evidence, both direct and circumstantial, will be taken into account and theevidence, both direct and circumstantial, will be taken into account and the
benefit of reasonable doubt will be given to the claimant. The benefit will bebenefit of reasonable doubt will be given to the claimant. The benefit will be
given more liberally to the claimant in field service cases.given more liberally to the claimant in field service cases.
RuleRule 6 (a) (i)6 (a) (i) Injuries sustained when the man is on duty will be deemed to Injuries sustained when the man is on duty will be deemed to
have arisen in or resulted from military service but in cases of injuries duehave arisen in or resulted from military service but in cases of injuries due
to serious negligence/ misconduct, the question of reducing the pensionto serious negligence/ misconduct, the question of reducing the pension
will be considers.will be considers.
RuleRule 7 (b) -7 (b) - A disease which has led to an individual’s discharge or death A disease which has led to an individual’s discharge or death
will ordinarily be deemed to have arisen in service if no note of it was madewill ordinarily be deemed to have arisen in service if no note of it was made
at the time of the individual’s acceptance for military service. However ifat the time of the individual’s acceptance for military service. However if
medical opinion hold, for reasons to be stated, that the disease could notmedical opinion hold, for reasons to be stated, that the disease could not
have been detected on medical examination prior to acceptance for servicehave been detected on medical examination prior to acceptance for service
the disease will not be deemed to have arisen during service.the disease will not be deemed to have arisen during service.
Pension Regulations for the Army Part II Pension Regulations for the Army Part II
RegulationsRegulations 22 - All officers dealing with pension claims shall bear in mind - All officers dealing with pension claims shall bear in mind
that delay in the payment of pension may involve great hardship and shallthat delay in the payment of pension may involve great hardship and shall
do everything in their power to prevent or shorten to the utmost suchdo everything in their power to prevent or shorten to the utmost such
delays.delays.
RegulationsRegulations 2020 -The procedure to be followed for the submission and -The procedure to be followed for the submission and
disposal of applications for various pensioners’ awards shall be as laiddisposal of applications for various pensioners’ awards shall be as laid
down in Table IV. down in Table IV.
TABLE IV TABLE IV
ItemItem Nature ofNature of Forms of applicationForms of application to whomto whom RemarksRemarks
No.No. ClaimClaim and supportingand supporting ApplicationApplication
DocumentsDocuments Should beShould be
SubmittedSubmitted
44 Disability Disability (i) Invaliding medical board (i) Invaliding medical board from the record from the record
Pension Pension proceedings – AFMSF -16. proceedings – AFMSF -16. officer to theofficer to the
(ii) Medical categorisation forms.(ii) Medical categorisation forms. Controller of Controller of
(iii) Medical History Envelope (iii) Medical History Envelope Defence Defence
with other medical documents. accounts with other medical documents. accounts
(iv) Service and casualty form,(iv) Service and casualty form, (Pension)(Pension)
8
(v) Injury report(v) Injury report
(vi) Extracts from part II orders (vi) Extracts from part II orders
(vii) Sheet Roll(vii) Sheet Roll
(viii) Last Pay certificate(viii) Last Pay certificate
RegulationsRegulations 83 - 83 - Save as otherwise provided in Section II and III rd Save as otherwise provided in Section II and III rd
(A)(A) First claim for pension or allowance and claims for gratuity underFirst claim for pension or allowance and claims for gratuity under
these Regulations, preferred within 12 months of the date on whichthese Regulations, preferred within 12 months of the date on which
they fall due shall be entertained and paid with full arrears, itthey fall due shall be entertained and paid with full arrears, it
otherwise in order :otherwise in order :
(B)(B) Those which are not preferred within that period may be admitted withThose which are not preferred within that period may be admitted with
full arrears, if the pension sanctioning authority concerned is satisfiedfull arrears, if the pension sanctioning authority concerned is satisfied
with the claimant’s explanation for the delay in their submissions; if hewith the claimant’s explanation for the delay in their submissions; if he
not satisfied with the explanation , claims shall be submitted for ordersnot satisfied with the explanation , claims shall be submitted for orders
of the Government.of the Government.
RegulationsRegulations - 90 - 90 - The term “claimant” for the purpose of regulations 83, - The term “claimant” for the purpose of regulations 83,
88 and 89 shall mean Record Officer.88 and 89 shall mean Record Officer.
20.20. That no formal application is required from the petitioner for the grant ofThat no formal application is required from the petitioner for the grant of
disability pension/ injury pension. The officer -in- charge, Records, RAJRIFdisability pension/ injury pension. The officer -in- charge, Records, RAJRIF
Centre Delhi Cantt. (NP5) , who is claimant in this case was promptly toCentre Delhi Cantt. (NP5) , who is claimant in this case was promptly to
forward the petitioner’s case to the CDA (P) (NP4) for grant of disabilityforward the petitioner’s case to the CDA (P) (NP4) for grant of disability
pension as per Regulations 2, 20, 83, 90 and Table IV of the Pensionpension as per Regulations 2, 20, 83, 90 and Table IV of the Pension
Regulations for the Army part II, respondents not only failed to carry out theRegulations for the Army part II, respondents not only failed to carry out the
statutory duty cast up on them but did not even act correctly and submit thestatutory duty cast up on them but did not even act correctly and submit the
petitioners case to the PCDA (P) for adjudication of his disability pensionpetitioners case to the PCDA (P) for adjudication of his disability pension
claim in spite of petitioner’s several representations.claim in spite of petitioner’s several representations.
21.21. That rejection of the petitioner’s disability claim on the ground that since theThat rejection of the petitioner’s disability claim on the ground that since the
petitioner was discharged on account of war injury i.e. invalided out frompetitioner was discharged on account of war injury i.e. invalided out from
the army and was granted disability pension which was assessed later onthe army and was granted disability pension which was assessed later on
less than 20% that is why he is not being granted disability pension. Theless than 20% that is why he is not being granted disability pension. The
action of Officer – in – Charge, RAJ RIF Regiment Abhilekh Karyaylayaaction of Officer – in – Charge, RAJ RIF Regiment Abhilekh Karyaylaya
(Records) Delhi Cantt. - 10 is arbitrary, erroneous, contrary to the rules(Records) Delhi Cantt. - 10 is arbitrary, erroneous, contrary to the rules
9
and settled proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Courtand settled proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
and Hon’ ble High Courts as brought out hereinafter : -and Hon’ ble High Courts as brought out hereinafter : -
22.22. The petitioner was enrolled in Army in Category A, suffered injury duringThe petitioner was enrolled in Army in Category A, suffered injury during
world war second 1945 and discharged from service on account of warworld war second 1945 and discharged from service on account of war
injury medical category 3, he is fully entitled for grant of disability pensioninjury medical category 3, he is fully entitled for grant of disability pension
as per Regulation 173 read with Rules 1, 4, 6 (a), 7 (b) of Appendix II to theas per Regulation 173 read with Rules 1, 4, 6 (a), 7 (b) of Appendix II to the
pension regulations for the army Part I and law laid down by the Hon’blepension regulations for the army Part I and law laid down by the Hon’ble
courts.courts.
23.23. That a large number of similarly situated persons have been grantedThat a large number of similarly situated persons have been granted
disability pension but the petitioner is being discriminated in violation ofdisability pension but the petitioner is being discriminated in violation of
articles 14, 16 and 300-A of the Constitution of India.articles 14, 16 and 300-A of the Constitution of India.
24.24. That under the regulation no formal application is required from theThat under the regulation no formal application is required from the
petitioner for grant of disability pension, the Officer Incharge Records,petitioner for grant of disability pension, the Officer Incharge Records,
RAJRIF Regiment Centre Delhi Cantt. (NP5), who is claimant in this caseRAJRIF Regiment Centre Delhi Cantt. (NP5), who is claimant in this case
is required to promptly submit the disability pension claim of the petitioneris required to promptly submit the disability pension claim of the petitioner
to PCDA (P) (NP4) as per the rules authority has not only failed to carry outto PCDA (P) (NP4) as per the rules authority has not only failed to carry out
the statutory duty cast on him but has not even acted correctly in spite ofthe statutory duty cast on him but has not even acted correctly in spite of
petitioner’s repeated requests.petitioner’s repeated requests.
25.25. That the Officer Incharge Records, RAJRIF Regimen Centre Delhi Cantt.That the Officer Incharge Records, RAJRIF Regimen Centre Delhi Cantt.
(NP5) is not competent to decide about the eligibility of the petitioner for(NP5) is not competent to decide about the eligibility of the petitioner for
grant of the disability pension but has to submit the petitioner’s case to thegrant of the disability pension but has to submit the petitioner’s case to the
PCDA (P) for adjudication as per the rules but NP5 has not submitted hisPCDA (P) for adjudication as per the rules but NP5 has not submitted his
case for adjudication to the PCDA (P) and failed to act as per the mandatecase for adjudication to the PCDA (P) and failed to act as per the mandate
of Army Pension Regulation, 1940 as well as new Pension Regulation forof Army Pension Regulation, 1940 as well as new Pension Regulation for
Army, 1961 rules.Army, 1961 rules.
10
26.26. That in a catena of cases this Hon’ble Court has ordered to release theThat in a catena of cases this Hon’ble Court has ordered to release the
disability pension in an exact identical case of disability pension in an exact identical case of Chhagan Kanwar Vs UnionChhagan Kanwar Vs Union
of India 2004 RDD41 CD (Raj.)of India 2004 RDD41 CD (Raj.) his Lordship of this Hon’ ble Court Hon’ ble his Lordship of this Hon’ ble Court Hon’ ble
Justice Shri Ashok Parihar observed and held in Para 4 to 6 as under thatJustice Shri Ashok Parihar observed and held in Para 4 to 6 as under that
Para 4 :-Para 4 :- Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the above Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the above
Army Instructions of the year 1975 were to take effect from 01.01.1973 i.e.Army Instructions of the year 1975 were to take effect from 01.01.1973 i.e.
The same will apply to all those who were in the effective strength of armyThe same will apply to all those who were in the effective strength of army
on that date and who became non effective thereafter.on that date and who became non effective thereafter.
Para 5 :-Para 5 :- On the other hand, Mr. Bhadauria, learned Counsel for the On the other hand, Mr. Bhadauria, learned Counsel for the
petitioner submitted that the above instructions issued on 19.12.1975 camepetitioner submitted that the above instructions issued on 19.12.1975 came
to be challenged before Allahabad High Court to the extent of fixing the cutto be challenged before Allahabad High Court to the extent of fixing the cut
off date as 01.01.1973. Reference has been made to off date as 01.01.1973. Reference has been made to 1993 (III) CSJ 491993 (III) CSJ 49
(HC), Ram Roop Singh vs. Union of India & Ors.(HC), Ram Roop Singh vs. Union of India & Ors. A copy of the A copy of the
judgment has also been placed on record. In the above judgment, thejudgment has also been placed on record. In the above judgment, the
learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court, relying upon thelearned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court, relying upon the
judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of D.S. Nakara, quashed thejudgment of the Supreme Court in the case of D.S. Nakara, quashed the
cut off date i.e., 01.01.1973, as referred in the Circular dated 19.12.1975cut off date i.e., 01.01.1973, as referred in the Circular dated 19.12.1975
and held that the Army Instructions dated 19.12.1975 must be applied to alland held that the Army Instructions dated 19.12.1975 must be applied to all
covered by it whether retired before or after 01.01.1973.covered by it whether retired before or after 01.01.1973.
Para 6:-Para 6:- In the present case, the concerned employee has been denied In the present case, the concerned employee has been denied
disability pension for the period from 17.11.1975 till 19disability pension for the period from 17.11.1975 till 19 thth June, 1999. As June, 1999. As
such, as per the circular referred above, he was entitled for service elementsuch, as per the circular referred above, he was entitled for service element
for the above period.for the above period.
Para 7:-Para 7:- Accordingly, their writ petition is partly allowed. The respondents Accordingly, their writ petition is partly allowed. The respondents
are directed to make the payment of service element which the concernedare directed to make the payment of service element which the concerned
employee was entitled for the period from 17.11.1975 till 28employee was entitled for the period from 17.11.1975 till 28 thth June, 1999 to June, 1999 to
the petitioner after calculating the same as per the instructions andthe petitioner after calculating the same as per the instructions and
11
regulations as applicable on such employees. Necessary calculation beregulations as applicable on such employees. Necessary calculation be
made and due amount be paid to the petitioner within sixty days from themade and due amount be paid to the petitioner within sixty days from the
date of receipt of certified copy of this order. If family pension has yet notdate of receipt of certified copy of this order. If family pension has yet not
been paid, the same will also be paid with arrears within the aforesaidbeen paid, the same will also be paid with arrears within the aforesaid
period. There is nothing on record to show that the judgment of Allahabadperiod. There is nothing on record to show that the judgment of Allahabad
High Court in Ram Roop Singh’s case has further been challenged by theHigh Court in Ram Roop Singh’s case has further been challenged by the
respondents. As such, it was duty of the authorities of the respondents torespondents. As such, it was duty of the authorities of the respondents to
automatically give such benefit to all similarly situated concernedautomatically give such benefit to all similarly situated concerned
employees irrespective of their applying for the same or not. Such duty hasemployees irrespective of their applying for the same or not. Such duty has
been cast on the authorities under the Army Act and Regulations itself.been cast on the authorities under the Army Act and Regulations itself.
After retirement or discharge on any ground whatsoever most of theAfter retirement or discharge on any ground whatsoever most of the
persons settle in their remote native places and are not aware of theirpersons settle in their remote native places and are not aware of their
rights accruing after retirement. Considering entire facts andrights accruing after retirement. Considering entire facts and
circumstances, I deem it proper to allow a cost of Rs. 2000/- also to thecircumstances, I deem it proper to allow a cost of Rs. 2000/- also to the
petitioner, which may be paid along with arrears as ordered above.petitioner, which may be paid along with arrears as ordered above.
27.27. That in similar case of That in similar case of Smt. Teeja Devi Vs. Union of India 2005(8)Smt. Teeja Devi Vs. Union of India 2005(8)
RDD3028 (Raj.)RDD3028 (Raj.) his Lordship of this Court Hon’ ble Justice Shri Shiv Kumar his Lordship of this Court Hon’ ble Justice Shri Shiv Kumar
Sharma observed and held in Para 6 to 10 as under that.Sharma observed and held in Para 6 to 10 as under that.
Para 6:-Para 6:- Allahabad High Court in Allahabad High Court in Ram Roop Singh vs. Union of India &Ram Roop Singh vs. Union of India &
Ors., 1993 (III) Current Service Journal 49,Ors., 1993 (III) Current Service Journal 49, in Para’s No. 13, 14 and 15 in Para’s No. 13, 14 and 15
indicated thus: I find sufficient force in the contention of the learnedindicated thus: I find sufficient force in the contention of the learned
Counsel for the petitioner. The Supreme Court while examining the validityCounsel for the petitioner. The Supreme Court while examining the validity
of Ministry of Finance Memorandum No. F-19 (3). EV 79 dated 25.05.1979of Ministry of Finance Memorandum No. F-19 (3). EV 79 dated 25.05.1979
and Ministry of Defence Memorandum No. B. 40725/AG/P34-C (1816/ADand Ministry of Defence Memorandum No. B. 40725/AG/P34-C (1816/AD
(Pension), dated 28.09.1979 in the case of D.S. Nakara held that(Pension), dated 28.09.1979 in the case of D.S. Nakara held that
classification of pensioners who retired subsequent to that date wasclassification of pensioners who retired subsequent to that date was
arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It further observedarbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It further observed
that the date of retirement for the purpose of payment of liberalised pensionthat the date of retirement for the purpose of payment of liberalised pension
12
was not a relevant factor when a revised formula for computation ofwas not a relevant factor when a revised formula for computation of
pension was introduced and made effective from a particular date. It furtherpension was introduced and made effective from a particular date. It further
held that there was no intelligible differentia between the persons whoheld that there was no intelligible differentia between the persons who
retired prior to that date and those who retired after that date. The Supremeretired prior to that date and those who retired after that date. The Supreme
Court relied on its earlier judgment in the case of Ram Krishna Dalmia vs.Court relied on its earlier judgment in the case of Ram Krishna Dalmia vs.
S.R. Tendolkar, AIR 1958 SC 538 and further emphasised that theS.R. Tendolkar, AIR 1958 SC 538 and further emphasised that the
classification on the basis of the date of retirement was wholly illegal andclassification on the basis of the date of retirement was wholly illegal and
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
14. The facts of the present case and those in the case of D.S. Nakara14. The facts of the present case and those in the case of D.S. Nakara
bear similarity. Respondents have failed to show any distinguishing featurebear similarity. Respondents have failed to show any distinguishing feature
for not giving the benefit of above mentioned Army Instruction to thefor not giving the benefit of above mentioned Army Instruction to the
petitioner which has been denied to him simply for the reason that thepetitioner which has been denied to him simply for the reason that the
petitioner had retired prior to 01.01.1973. Learned Counsel too was at hispetitioner had retired prior to 01.01.1973. Learned Counsel too was at his
wits end in finding out any distinguishing feature to support the date fixed inwits end in finding out any distinguishing feature to support the date fixed in
the Army Instruction and save it from the vice of arbitrariness andthe Army Instruction and save it from the vice of arbitrariness and
unreasonable classification, which is forbidden by the Constitution underunreasonable classification, which is forbidden by the Constitution under
Articles 14 and 16. In my opinion, persons boarded out of army service forArticles 14 and 16. In my opinion, persons boarded out of army service for
reasons wholly attributable to army service prior to 01.01.1973 and thosereasons wholly attributable to army service prior to 01.01.1973 and those
boarded our for the same reasons after 01.01.1973 do not constituteboarded our for the same reasons after 01.01.1973 do not constitute
different classes so as to justify applicability of the Army Instruction No.different classes so as to justify applicability of the Army Instruction No.
4/S/75 dated 19.12.1975 to only those who are boarded out from active4/S/75 dated 19.12.1975 to only those who are boarded out from active
army service after the date. The Army Instruction dated 19.12.1975,army service after the date. The Army Instruction dated 19.12.1975,
therefore, must be applied to all covered by it whether retired before ortherefore, must be applied to all covered by it whether retired before or
after 01.01.1973. .after 01.01.1973. .
15. All those boarded out from the service for the same reason after or15. All those boarded out from the service for the same reason after or
before that date fall in the same class and bear similarity to each other and,before that date fall in the same class and bear similarity to each other and,
therefore, their classification for the purpose of payment of pension is nottherefore, their classification for the purpose of payment of pension is not
justified on the basis of the date of retirement which has no relation to thejustified on the basis of the date of retirement which has no relation to the
object of payment of pension which is sought to be achieved in theobject of payment of pension which is sought to be achieved in the
13
aforesaid Army Instruction. I, therefore, hold that the date (01.01.1973)aforesaid Army Instruction. I, therefore, hold that the date (01.01.1973)
fixed for the applicability of the Army Instruction No. 4/S/75 dated 19fixed for the applicability of the Army Instruction No. 4/S/75 dated 19 thth
December, 1975 is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and is,December, 1975 is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and is,
therefore, liable to be quashed. I, therefore, quash the penultimatetherefore, liable to be quashed. I, therefore, quash the penultimate
sentence in Para 1 of the Army Instruction No. 4/S/75 dated New Delhi,sentence in Para 1 of the Army Instruction No. 4/S/75 dated New Delhi,
December 19, 1975 which is to the following effect:December 19, 1975 which is to the following effect:
“”These orders will take effect from 1“”These orders will take effect from 1stst January, 1973, i.e., these will apply January, 1973, i.e., these will apply
to all those who were on the effective strength of the Army on that date andto all those who were on the effective strength of the Army on that date and
who became non-effective thereafter.””who became non-effective thereafter.””
and direct that the said Army Instruction shall be applicable to all armyand direct that the said Army Instruction shall be applicable to all army
personnel covered by it regardless of the date of their retirement."personnel covered by it regardless of the date of their retirement."
Para 7:-Para 7:- Evidently Army Instruction No. 4/S/75 dated December 19, 1975 Evidently Army Instruction No. 4/S/75 dated December 19, 1975
which contain the sentence "These orders will take effect from 1which contain the sentence "These orders will take effect from 1stst January, January,
1973, i i.e., these will apply to all those who were on the effective strength1973, i i.e., these will apply to all those who were on the effective strength
of the Army on that date and who became non-effective thereafter" wasof the Army on that date and who became non-effective thereafter" was
found violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and a direction was issuedfound violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and a direction was issued
that the said Army Instruction shall be applicable to all army personnelthat the said Army Instruction shall be applicable to all army personnel
covered by it regardless of the date of their retirement.covered by it regardless of the date of their retirement.
Para 8:-Para 8:- In the instant case the disease suffered by the petitioner during In the instant case the disease suffered by the petitioner during
and in the course of service was attributable to military service, as such theand in the course of service was attributable to military service, as such the
petitioner was fully entitled to disability pension and service element. In thepetitioner was fully entitled to disability pension and service element. In the
instant case the judicial pronouncement granting service element ofinstant case the judicial pronouncement granting service element of
pension to all ex-servicemen irrespective of their date of retirement came topension to all ex-servicemen irrespective of their date of retirement came to
be pronounced during 1992 in the case of be pronounced during 1992 in the case of Ramroop Singh vs. Union ofRamroop Singh vs. Union of
India, reported in 1993 (III) CSJ (HC) 49 (Allahabad).India, reported in 1993 (III) CSJ (HC) 49 (Allahabad). Therefore the Therefore the
relief sought by the petitioner cannot be denied.relief sought by the petitioner cannot be denied.
14
Para 9:-Para 9:- As already noticed the policy decision was taken during 1975 that As already noticed the policy decision was taken during 1975 that
person whose disability pension has been reduced below 20% andperson whose disability pension has been reduced below 20% and
resultantly their disability pension had been discontinued shall be grantedresultantly their disability pension had been discontinued shall be granted
service element of pensions for life if the disability in question wasservice element of pensions for life if the disability in question was
attributable to military service or aggravated thereby irrespective of lengthattributable to military service or aggravated thereby irrespective of length
of service. However, this decision was made effective from January 1,of service. However, this decision was made effective from January 1,
1973 onwards and the persons retired prior to this cut off date were1973 onwards and the persons retired prior to this cut off date were
deprived of such concession. This aspect of cut off date came to bedeprived of such concession. This aspect of cut off date came to be
examined judicially in the case of Ramroop Singh vs. Union of Indiaexamined judicially in the case of Ramroop Singh vs. Union of India
(Supra), and it was held that all ex-servicemen shall be entitled to(Supra), and it was held that all ex-servicemen shall be entitled to
pensionary benefits regardless to their date of retirement. Ratio indicated inpensionary benefits regardless to their date of retirement. Ratio indicated in
Ramroop Singh vs. Union of India (Supra), is squarely applicable to theRamroop Singh vs. Union of India (Supra), is squarely applicable to the
facts of the instant case. Further the respondents did not inform thefacts of the instant case. Further the respondents did not inform the
husband of the petitioner about discontinuance of the disability pension.husband of the petitioner about discontinuance of the disability pension.
Since, the husband of petitioner was entitled for the pensionary benefits;Since, the husband of petitioner was entitled for the pensionary benefits;
the petitioner is entitled for family pension. .the petitioner is entitled for family pension. .
Para 10:-Para 10:- For these reasons, I allow the writ petition and direct the For these reasons, I allow the writ petition and direct the
respondents to grant the petitioner the benefits of family pension from therespondents to grant the petitioner the benefits of family pension from the
date of death of her husband i.e. July 31, 1995. The respondents aredate of death of her husband i.e. July 31, 1995. The respondents are
directed to comply with the order within ninety days from the date of receiptdirected to comply with the order within ninety days from the date of receipt
of copy of this order. The parties shall bear their own costs.of copy of this order. The parties shall bear their own costs.
28.28. That in similar case of That in similar case of Sepoy Hukma Ram Vs Union of India 2005(8)Sepoy Hukma Ram Vs Union of India 2005(8)
RDD3033 (Raj.)RDD3033 (Raj.) his Lordship of this Hon’ ble Court Hon’ ble Justice Shri his Lordship of this Hon’ ble Court Hon’ ble Justice Shri
Ajay Rastogi observed and held in Para 4 to 10 as under that.Ajay Rastogi observed and held in Para 4 to 10 as under that.
Para 4:-Para 4:- According to him, cut off date i.e., 01.01.1973 referred to in the According to him, cut off date i.e., 01.01.1973 referred to in the
notification is arbitrary and has no nexus with the object sought to benotification is arbitrary and has no nexus with the object sought to be
achieved and all who have served the Army constitute one single class andachieved and all who have served the Army constitute one single class and
no differentia can be made so far as grant of disability and pensionableno differentia can be made so far as grant of disability and pensionable
15
element of service is concerned and all such army personnel whoseelement of service is concerned and all such army personnel whose
disability has fallen below 20% prior to the cut off date are also entitled bydisability has fallen below 20% prior to the cut off date are also entitled by
extending benefit of disability pension, consequently denial of pension toextending benefit of disability pension, consequently denial of pension to
the petitioner later by not extending such parity in no manner can be said tothe petitioner later by not extending such parity in no manner can be said to
have any nexus and is violative of Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution ofhave any nexus and is violative of Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of
India.India.
Para 5:-Para 5:- Shri Bhaduria placed reliance upon decision of this Court in Smt. Shri Bhaduria placed reliance upon decision of this Court in Smt.
Sinokhi vs. Union of India, 2002 (3) RLR 184 and submitted that in theSinokhi vs. Union of India, 2002 (3) RLR 184 and submitted that in the
case of Sinokhi (Supra), Notification dated 19.12.1975 came up forcase of Sinokhi (Supra), Notification dated 19.12.1975 came up for
consideration before this Court and cut off date 01.01.1973 as referred toconsideration before this Court and cut off date 01.01.1973 as referred to
the Notification (Supra), has been held to be arbitrary and violative ofthe Notification (Supra), has been held to be arbitrary and violative of
Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India, and the directions have beenArticles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India, and the directions have been
issued to the respondent for application of Army Instruction to all Armyissued to the respondent for application of Army Instruction to all Army
personnel regardless of the date of their retirement. Relevant part ofpersonnel regardless of the date of their retirement. Relevant part of
observations made by this Court in the case of Smt. Sinokhi (Supra), readsobservations made by this Court in the case of Smt. Sinokhi (Supra), reads
as under:- "10. Evidently Army Instruction No. 4/S/75 dated Decemberas under:- "10. Evidently Army Instruction No. 4/S/75 dated December
19, 1975 which contain the sentence "These orders will take effect from 119, 1975 which contain the sentence "These orders will take effect from 1 stst
January 1973, i.e., these will apply to all those who were on the effectiveJanuary 1973, i.e., these will apply to all those who were on the effective
strength of the Army on that date and who became non-effectivestrength of the Army on that date and who became non-effective
thereafter." was found violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and athereafter." was found violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and a
direction was issued that the said Army Instruction shall be applicable to alldirection was issued that the said Army Instruction shall be applicable to all
army personnel covered by it regardless of the date of their retirement."army personnel covered by it regardless of the date of their retirement."
Para 6:- Para 6:- The respondents have filed reply to writ petition. Shri Sanjay The respondents have filed reply to writ petition. Shri Sanjay
Pareek, Counsel for respondents submitted that as per provisions of ArmyPareek, Counsel for respondents submitted that as per provisions of Army
instruction, benefit of pension has been extended to only those who haveinstruction, benefit of pension has been extended to only those who have
retired on 01.01.1973 for which some cut off date has to be fixed.retired on 01.01.1973 for which some cut off date has to be fixed.
Para 7:- Para 7:- However, it has not been disputed by Shri Pareek that self same However, it has not been disputed by Shri Pareek that self same
controversy raised in present petition with regard to cut off date ofcontroversy raised in present petition with regard to cut off date of
16
01.01.1973 as referred to in Notification dated 19.12.1975 has been01.01.1973 as referred to in Notification dated 19.12.1975 has been
examined in the case of Smt. Sinokhi (Supra), and as a consequence andexamined in the case of Smt. Sinokhi (Supra), and as a consequence and
in compliance thereof, benefit of pension thereafter has already beenin compliance thereof, benefit of pension thereafter has already been
extended to concerned writ petitioner.extended to concerned writ petitioner.
Para 8:-Para 8:- Shri Bhaduria has also informed to this Court that the judgment in Shri Bhaduria has also informed to this Court that the judgment in
the case of Smt. Sinokhi (Supra), has attained finality and no appeal hasthe case of Smt. Sinokhi (Supra), has attained finality and no appeal has
been preferred against it.been preferred against it.
Para 9:- Para 9:- In this view of the matter, in my opinion, no further adjudication In this view of the matter, in my opinion, no further adjudication
with regard to cut off date is required to be examined any further in the lightwith regard to cut off date is required to be examined any further in the light
of decision of this Court in Smt. Sinokhi vs. Union of India (Supra), of decision of this Court in Smt. Sinokhi vs. Union of India (Supra),
Para 10:- Para 10:- Consequently, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents areConsequently, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are
directed to allow the petitioner ordinary pension in accordance with Rulesdirected to allow the petitioner ordinary pension in accordance with Rules
along with all other consequential benefits. Compliance of the order bealong with all other consequential benefits. Compliance of the order be
made within three months. The parties shall bear their own costs.made within three months. The parties shall bear their own costs.
29.29. That in similar case of That in similar case of Pratap Singh Vs Union of India 2005(8) RDD3161Pratap Singh Vs Union of India 2005(8) RDD3161
(Raj.)(Raj.) his Lordship of this Hon’ ble Court Hon’ ble Justice Shri Ajay Rastogi his Lordship of this Hon’ ble Court Hon’ ble Justice Shri Ajay Rastogi
observed and held in Para 16 to 20 as under that.observed and held in Para 16 to 20 as under that.
Para 16:-Para 16:- Here I may hasten to observe that it has always to be kept in Here I may hasten to observe that it has always to be kept in
mind and remembered that person does not acquire disability by choicemind and remembered that person does not acquire disability by choice
and individual who acquires disability must be protected by deservingand individual who acquires disability must be protected by deserving
sympathetic treatment and not for himself but for his family also; and thesympathetic treatment and not for himself but for his family also; and the
protection has to be provided which may serve purpose and object forprotection has to be provided which may serve purpose and object for
which disability pension is being extended to individuals. Beneficialwhich disability pension is being extended to individuals. Beneficial
provision in this regard has been made by respondents providing disabilityprovision in this regard has been made by respondents providing disability
pension to such pensioners /individuals under Army Pension Regulations.pension to such pensioners /individuals under Army Pension Regulations.
Para 17 :-Para 17 :- For grant of disability pension, object behind it is that those who For grant of disability pension, object behind it is that those who
served defence service and because of disability, when one becomesserved defence service and because of disability, when one becomes
17
incapable for army service and alternative employment in hisincapable for army service and alternative employment in his
trade/category suitable to his nature of duty is not available and thetrade/category suitable to his nature of duty is not available and the
decision is taken for his discharge from service, individual must bedecision is taken for his discharge from service, individual must be
provided with disability pension, and being a beneficial provision by thisprovided with disability pension, and being a beneficial provision by this
mode, means can be provided for survival and to maintain his family bymode, means can be provided for survival and to maintain his family by
way of grant of disability pension.way of grant of disability pension.
Para 18:-Para 18:- Keeping this object into consideration, in my opinion, Regulations Keeping this object into consideration, in my opinion, Regulations
173 and 173-A deals in different sphere. Regulation 173 deals with all173 and 173-A deals in different sphere. Regulation 173 deals with all
kinds of disability where individuals are placed in either of the medicalkinds of disability where individuals are placed in either of the medical
category as defined in classification of disease appended to the Entitlementcategory as defined in classification of disease appended to the Entitlement
Rules. But Regulation 173-A is only confined to such individual who areRules. But Regulation 173-A is only confined to such individual who are
placed in low medical category other than "E" (permanently) andplaced in low medical category other than "E" (permanently) and
discharged form services since no alternative employment in hisdischarged form services since no alternative employment in his
trade/category is available and in such contingency, after being dischargedtrade/category is available and in such contingency, after being discharged
from army service, some means for livelihood has to be provided to them.from army service, some means for livelihood has to be provided to them.
In my opinion, petitioner's case for grant of disability pension is coveredIn my opinion, petitioner's case for grant of disability pension is covered
under Regulation 173-A and not under Regulation 173 as contended byunder Regulation 173-A and not under Regulation 173 as contended by
respondents and both the restrictions as referred to in Regulation 173 withrespondents and both the restrictions as referred to in Regulation 173 with
regard to disability being (a) attributable to or aggravated in army service,regard to disability being (a) attributable to or aggravated in army service,
and (b) assessed at 20% or over, cannot be made applicable for grant ofand (b) assessed at 20% or over, cannot be made applicable for grant of
disability pension to such individuals who are covered by Regulation 173-Adisability pension to such individuals who are covered by Regulation 173-A
of Army Pension Regulations. In the absence of which instead of achievingof Army Pension Regulations. In the absence of which instead of achieving
the object of the beneficial provision it will defeat the very purpose forthe object of the beneficial provision it will defeat the very purpose for
which provision has been inserted by amendment in 1967.which provision has been inserted by amendment in 1967.
Para 19 :-Para 19 :- So far objection raised with regard to the delay in filing writ So far objection raised with regard to the delay in filing writ
petition is concerned, in my opinion, denial of disability pension to petitionerpetition is concerned, in my opinion, denial of disability pension to petitioner
for years was a continuous wrong and such action of respondents was infor years was a continuous wrong and such action of respondents was in
breach of Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India. It is the duty ofbreach of Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India. It is the duty of
18
respondents to have paid disability pension to petitioner when he wasrespondents to have paid disability pension to petitioner when he was
discharged from service but he made representations to the authorities,discharged from service but he made representations to the authorities,
thereafter approached this Court by filing writ petition and in compliance ofthereafter approached this Court by filing writ petition and in compliance of
direction given by this Court in his earlier writ petition, he wasdirection given by this Court in his earlier writ petition, he was
communicated with impugned decision dated 10.01.1997 (Annexure-15).communicated with impugned decision dated 10.01.1997 (Annexure-15).
This being continuous wrong, in present facts and circumstances, thereThis being continuous wrong, in present facts and circumstances, there
was no latches on the part of petitioner in approaching this Court andwas no latches on the part of petitioner in approaching this Court and
immediately after he was communicated with decision (Annexure-15), heimmediately after he was communicated with decision (Annexure-15), he
preferred this writ petition. In such fact situation, preliminary objectionpreferred this writ petition. In such fact situation, preliminary objection
raised of laches on the part of petitioner in approaching this Court does notraised of laches on the part of petitioner in approaching this Court does not
have any merit and, therefore, stands over-ruled.have any merit and, therefore, stands over-ruled.
Para 20 :-Para 20 :- Consequently this writ petition is allowed the decision of Consequently this writ petition is allowed the decision of
respondents holding the petitioner not entitled for disability pension viderespondents holding the petitioner not entitled for disability pension vide
order dated 10.01.1997 (Annexure-15) conveyed in consonance withorder dated 10.01.1997 (Annexure-15) conveyed in consonance with
orders referred to in Annexure-15, is quashed and set aside. Respondentsorders referred to in Annexure-15, is quashed and set aside. Respondents
are accordingly directed to release disability pension with all consequentialare accordingly directed to release disability pension with all consequential
benefits to the petitioner in terms of Regulation 173-A of Army Pensionbenefits to the petitioner in terms of Regulation 173-A of Army Pension
Regulations, 1961 with effect from the date he became entitled for suchRegulations, 1961 with effect from the date he became entitled for such
pension, i.e., from the date he was placed in a low medical category CEEpension, i.e., from the date he was placed in a low medical category CEE
(P) and discharged from service. Arrears of disability pension after its(P) and discharged from service. Arrears of disability pension after its
computation in compliance of aforesaid direction be paid to petitioner withincomputation in compliance of aforesaid direction be paid to petitioner within
three months, failing which he shall be entitled to interest towards arrearsthree months, failing which he shall be entitled to interest towards arrears
of disability pension @ 9% p.a., thereafter. No order as to costs.of disability pension @ 9% p.a., thereafter. No order as to costs.
30.30. That in a similar case of That in a similar case of B.L.Swarnkar Vs Union of India & ors 2005(9)B.L.Swarnkar Vs Union of India & ors 2005(9)
RDD3911 (Raj.) (DB)RDD3911 (Raj.) (DB) their Lordships of this Hon’ ble Court Hon’ ble Justice their Lordships of this Hon’ ble Court Hon’ ble Justice
Shri N.N. Mathur and Hon’ ble Justice Shri Gopal Krishna Vyas observedShri N.N. Mathur and Hon’ ble Justice Shri Gopal Krishna Vyas observed
and held in Para 4 to 7 of the judgement as underand held in Para 4 to 7 of the judgement as under
19
Para 4:- Para 4:- We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and considered We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and considered
the rival contentions. Regulation 173 and Rule 7(b) of Appendix IIthe rival contentions. Regulation 173 and Rule 7(b) of Appendix II
(Entitlement Rules) which has material bearing on the controversy are(Entitlement Rules) which has material bearing on the controversy are
extracted as follows:-extracted as follows:-
"173. Unless otherwise specifically provided a disability pension may be"173. Unless otherwise specifically provided a disability pension may be
granted to an individual who is invalidated from service on account of agranted to an individual who is invalidated from service on account of a
disability which is attributable to or aggravated by military service and isdisability which is attributable to or aggravated by military service and is
assessed at 20 per cent or over."assessed at 20 per cent or over."
"7(b). A disease which has led to an individual discharge or death will"7(b). A disease which has led to an individual discharge or death will
ordinarily be deemed to have arisen in service if no note of it was made atordinarily be deemed to have arisen in service if no note of it was made at
the time of individual's acceptance for military service. However, if medicalthe time of individual's acceptance for military service. However, if medical
opinion holds, for reasons to be stated, that the disease could not haveopinion holds, for reasons to be stated, that the disease could not have
been detected on medical examination prior to acceptance for service thebeen detected on medical examination prior to acceptance for service the
disease will not be deemed to have arisen during service."disease will not be deemed to have arisen during service."
A combined reading of the Regulation 173 and 7 (b) of Appendix II showsA combined reading of the Regulation 173 and 7 (b) of Appendix II shows
that because of disability which has led to the person concerned beingthat because of disability which has led to the person concerned being
discharged from service deemed to have arisen in service if no note of itdischarged from service deemed to have arisen in service if no note of it
was made at the time of entry in the Armed Forces or that he was sufferingwas made at the time of entry in the Armed Forces or that he was suffering
from such disability or unless a note is recorded at a subsequent date thatfrom such disability or unless a note is recorded at a subsequent date that
the disease in question was such as could not have been detected bythe disease in question was such as could not have been detected by
medical examination before he had joined the service. In the instant case,medical examination before he had joined the service. In the instant case,
there is no note in the service record of the appellant that at the time ofthere is no note in the service record of the appellant that at the time of
entry in Air Force he was suffering from such disability. Thus, it has to beentry in Air Force he was suffering from such disability. Thus, it has to be
presumed that the disease the appellant suffered from and due to which hepresumed that the disease the appellant suffered from and due to which he
was required to be discharged has arisen during his service on account ofwas required to be discharged has arisen during his service on account of
stress, as such the same was attributable to his Air Force Service.stress, as such the same was attributable to his Air Force Service.
20
Para 5:- Para 5:- As far as the decision of the Apex Court in Baljit Singh's case is As far as the decision of the Apex Court in Baljit Singh's case is
concerned, the same has no application to the facts of the case. It was aconcerned, the same has no application to the facts of the case. It was a
case dealing with an injury and not the disease. Thus, the learned Singlecase dealing with an injury and not the disease. Thus, the learned Single
Judge has committed an error in holding that the appellant has failed toJudge has committed an error in holding that the appellant has failed to
prove that disease is attributable to Air Force Service or has beenprove that disease is attributable to Air Force Service or has been
aggravated because of Air Force Service. In our considered the onus ofaggravated because of Air Force Service. In our considered the onus of
proof with regard to the claim to disability pension did not rest upon theproof with regard to the claim to disability pension did not rest upon the
claimant and, in fact lay with the Air Force authorities in case his claim wasclaimant and, in fact lay with the Air Force authorities in case his claim was
to be denied.to be denied.
Para 6:- Para 6:- It is next argued by Mr. V.K. Mathur learned Counsel for Indian It is next argued by Mr. V.K. Mathur learned Counsel for Indian
Air Force that the appellant is not entitled to pension as he has notAir Force that the appellant is not entitled to pension as he has not
completed 10 years of qualified service. It is not in dispute that thecompleted 10 years of qualified service. It is not in dispute that the
appellant is short of 13 days of qualified service. There is a provision forappellant is short of 13 days of qualified service. There is a provision for
condonation of deficiency in service for eligibility to service/reservistcondonation of deficiency in service for eligibility to service/reservist
Pension Rules. Rules 114 and 115 reads as follows:-Pension Rules. Rules 114 and 115 reads as follows:-
"114. Except in the case of:"114. Except in the case of:
(a) An individual who is discharged at his own request.(a) An individual who is discharged at his own request.
(b) An individual who is eligible for special pension or gratuity under(b) An individual who is eligible for special pension or gratuity under
Regulation 144, or Regulation 144, or
(c) An individual who is invalided with less than 15 years service, deficiency(c) An individual who is invalided with less than 15 years service, deficiency
in service for eligibility to service pension or reservist pension or gratuity, inin service for eligibility to service pension or reservist pension or gratuity, in
lieu, may be condoned by a competent authority up to six months in eachlieu, may be condoned by a competent authority up to six months in each
case." case."
"115. (a) Airmen who have former service to their credit may be allowed by"115. (a) Airmen who have former service to their credit may be allowed by
the competent authority to reckon to the extent specified in the table belowthe competent authority to reckon to the extent specified in the table below
such service towards pension when earned by requisite qualifying servicesuch service towards pension when earned by requisite qualifying service
subject to the fulfilment of the conditions stated in Column 4 of the table." subject to the fulfilment of the conditions stated in Column 4 of the table."
21
Para 7:- Para 7:- It is submitted that the said rules has no application to disability It is submitted that the said rules has no application to disability
pension. Be that as it may, this Court in its equity jurisdiction has amplepension. Be that as it may, this Court in its equity jurisdiction has ample
power to condone the period of 13 days in exercise of powers under Articlepower to condone the period of 13 days in exercise of powers under Article
226 of the Constitution of India to cover up the qualified period of service.226 of the Constitution of India to cover up the qualified period of service.
Accordingly, in order to secure ends of justice, we condone the short periodAccordingly, in order to secure ends of justice, we condone the short period
of 13 days and held the appellant qualified for disability pension.of 13 days and held the appellant qualified for disability pension.
Para 8:- Para 8:- Consequently, the special appeal is allowed. The order of the Consequently, the special appeal is allowed. The order of the
learned Single Judge dated 17learned Single Judge dated 17thth September, 1997 is set aside. The writ September, 1997 is set aside. The writ
petition is allowed. The appellant will be entitled to disability pension underpetition is allowed. The appellant will be entitled to disability pension under
the rules referred to above. The respondents are directed to pay disabilitythe rules referred to above. The respondents are directed to pay disability
pension to the appellant from the date it fell due within a period of fourpension to the appellant from the date it fell due within a period of four
months from today. No order as to cost.months from today. No order as to cost.
31.31. That in a similar case of That in a similar case of Rampal Singh Vs Union of India AIR 1984 SCRampal Singh Vs Union of India AIR 1984 SC
504,504, who was injured in 1965 INDO –PAK war and discharged being found who was injured in 1965 INDO –PAK war and discharged being found
un-desirable after repeated court martial, the Hon’ble Supreme court heldun-desirable after repeated court martial, the Hon’ble Supreme court held
that he is entitled for disability pension, interest and some compensation forthat he is entitled for disability pension, interest and some compensation for
the harassment as also the costs of litigation.the harassment as also the costs of litigation.
32.32. That in the case of That in the case of Ex – Subedar Baljor Singh Vs Union of India 1997Ex – Subedar Baljor Singh Vs Union of India 1997
(6) SLR 368,(6) SLR 368, who was denied disability pension on the ground that he was who was denied disability pension on the ground that he was
discharged from service on his own request before completion of thedischarged from service on his own request before completion of the
prescribed service /age, it was held that impugned orders which proceedprescribed service /age, it was held that impugned orders which proceed
on the basis that it was a simplicitor voluntary discharge and not dischargeon the basis that it was a simplicitor voluntary discharge and not discharge
on medical grounds being bad in law are liable to be quashed and seton medical grounds being bad in law are liable to be quashed and set
aside and the petitioner is entitled to the disability pension.aside and the petitioner is entitled to the disability pension.
33.33. That it has been further held in case of That it has been further held in case of Lt Col B S Melhotra Vs Union ofLt Col B S Melhotra Vs Union of
India – 1968 (2) SLR 81India – 1968 (2) SLR 81 that people who become disabled due to military that people who become disabled due to military
service are a class apart , they cannot be discriminated nor deniedservice are a class apart , they cannot be discriminated nor denied
22
disability pension on the ground of voluntary retirement, the disability doesdisability pension on the ground of voluntary retirement, the disability does
not cease on voluntary retirement.not cease on voluntary retirement.
34.34. That in case of That in case of Karan Singh Vs Union of India 2000 (2) SLR 87,Karan Singh Vs Union of India 2000 (2) SLR 87, the the
petitioner who suffered a bullet injury in 1965, was allowed disabilitypetitioner who suffered a bullet injury in 1965, was allowed disability
pension along with interest.pension along with interest.
35.35. That in case of Ramkumar Singh Vs Union of India – SBCWP No. 4904/97That in case of Ramkumar Singh Vs Union of India – SBCWP No. 4904/97
decided on 27 Mar 99, who was injured during INDO-PAK war 1965 anddecided on 27 Mar 99, who was injured during INDO-PAK war 1965 and
denied disability pension on the ground that he was discharged on his owndenied disability pension on the ground that he was discharged on his own
request on compensate grounds, was held entitled for disability pensionrequest on compensate grounds, was held entitled for disability pension
with cost and interest by this Hon’ble Court.with cost and interest by this Hon’ble Court.
36.36. That the petitioner’s husband’s case for disability pension was beingThat the petitioner’s husband’s case for disability pension was being
examined by the Army Headquarters but in the mean time he expire onexamined by the Army Headquarters but in the mean time he expire on
2.09.1998 but even today the decision of Army Headquarters has not been2.09.1998 but even today the decision of Army Headquarters has not been
communicated to the petitioner. Photostatted copy of death certificate ofcommunicated to the petitioner. Photostatted copy of death certificate of
the petitioners husband dated 2.09.1998 issued by the Tehsildar has beenthe petitioners husband dated 2.09.1998 issued by the Tehsildar has been
filed here with and marked as filed here with and marked as ANNEXTURE - 4ANNEXTURE - 4 of the writ petition. of the writ petition.
37.37. That on 6-04-2009 petitioner served up on the answering respondents aThat on 6-04-2009 petitioner served up on the answering respondents a
legal notice for want of Justice through her counsel, Photostatted copy oflegal notice for want of Justice through her counsel, Photostatted copy of
legal notice for want of Justice dated 6.04.2009 is being filed here with andlegal notice for want of Justice dated 6.04.2009 is being filed here with and
marked as marked as ANNEXTURE – 18 ANNEXTURE – 18 of the Writ Petition. of the Writ Petition.
38.38. That the petitioner has to support her family, children and she is not able toThat the petitioner has to support her family, children and she is not able to
earn her livelihood and has no other source of income. earn her livelihood and has no other source of income.
39.39. That the following documents relevant and essential in the case of theThat the following documents relevant and essential in the case of the
petitioner have not been supplied to her in spite of repeated requests :-petitioner have not been supplied to her in spite of repeated requests :-
I.I. Enrolment form.Enrolment form.
23
II.II. Sheet Roll.Sheet Roll.
III.III. Service and casualty formService and casualty form
IV.IV. Injury Report.Injury Report.
V.V. Details of filed service.Details of filed service.
VI.VI. Details of hospitalisation.Details of hospitalisation.
VII.VII. Medical documents including AFMSFs 2A, 15, 15A, 16, 16 and 81.Medical documents including AFMSFs 2A, 15, 15A, 16, 16 and 81.
40.40. That the petitioner in such circumstanced has no alternate by efficaciousThat the petitioner in such circumstanced has no alternate by efficacious
speedy remedy except to approach this Hon’ ble court for redress of herspeedy remedy except to approach this Hon’ ble court for redress of her
grievances under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Since feelinggrievances under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Since feeling
aggrieved by the action of the non-petitioners is not sanctioning disabilityaggrieved by the action of the non-petitioners is not sanctioning disability
pension to the petitioner, the present writ petition is being preferred on thepension to the petitioner, the present writ petition is being preferred on the
basis of following grounds amongst other:-basis of following grounds amongst other:-
Grounds:-Grounds:-
A.A. Because the petitioner is lawfully entitled for grant of disability pension asBecause the petitioner is lawfully entitled for grant of disability pension as
per the rules w.e.f. 20per the rules w.e.f. 20thth December 1949 therefore, depriving him of his right December 1949 therefore, depriving him of his right
to the same is not only illegal and arbitrary but also unconstitutional andto the same is not only illegal and arbitrary but also unconstitutional and
non-petitioners cannot be allowed to act in such illegal manner.non-petitioners cannot be allowed to act in such illegal manner.
B.B. Because, the pension is a fundamental right and properly in the hands ofBecause, the pension is a fundamental right and properly in the hands of
the petitioner as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court andthe petitioner as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and
non-payment of pension violates his fundamental right guaranteed undernon-payment of pension violates his fundamental right guaranteed under
the frame work of the constitution of India.the frame work of the constitution of India.
C.C. Because, sanction of disability pension has been accorded by theBecause, sanction of disability pension has been accorded by the
department of respondents many similarly situated persons are gettingdepartment of respondents many similarly situated persons are getting
disability pension but the petitioner is being denied the same without anydisability pension but the petitioner is being denied the same without any
rhyme or reason, and violates his right of equality guaranteed under therhyme or reason, and violates his right of equality guaranteed under the
articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India,articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India,
24
D.D. Because, this Hon’ble Court in various such cases has been pleased toBecause, this Hon’ble Court in various such cases has been pleased to
declare various individuals eligible for grant of disability pension asdeclare various individuals eligible for grant of disability pension as
narrated in the foregoing Para’s of the writ petition.narrated in the foregoing Para’s of the writ petition.
E.E. Because, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been pleased to held in case ofBecause, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been pleased to held in case of
M.S. Shekhawat Vs Union of India reported in JT 1997 (6) SC 116 that it isM.S. Shekhawat Vs Union of India reported in JT 1997 (6) SC 116 that it is
duty of the court to interpret a provision specially a beneficial provisionduty of the court to interpret a provision specially a beneficial provision
liberally so as to give it a wider meaning rather to give a restrictive meaningliberally so as to give it a wider meaning rather to give a restrictive meaning
which would negate the very object of the rules.which would negate the very object of the rules.
F.F. Because the petitioner is fully entitled for grant of disability pension as perBecause the petitioner is fully entitled for grant of disability pension as per
the rules and law laid down by the Hon’ble courts as detailed out in histhe rules and law laid down by the Hon’ble courts as detailed out in his
petition and legal notice for demand of justice dated 6-04-2009 (Annexure -petition and legal notice for demand of justice dated 6-04-2009 (Annexure -
18) but the petitioner case has been rejected for no reason even without18) but the petitioner case has been rejected for no reason even without
submitting for adjudication by the competent authority.submitting for adjudication by the competent authority.
41.41. That the petitioner has not filed such other writ petition earlier to it beforeThat the petitioner has not filed such other writ petition earlier to it before
this Hon’ble court.this Hon’ble court.
42.42. That the petitioner has no alternative for redress of his grievances exceptThat the petitioner has no alternative for redress of his grievances except
approaching this Hon’ble court by way of filing the present writ petition.approaching this Hon’ble court by way of filing the present writ petition.
43.43. That the petitioner craves leave of this Hon’ble court to urge the further andThat the petitioner craves leave of this Hon’ble court to urge the further and
addition grounds at the time of hearing of this writ petition.addition grounds at the time of hearing of this writ petition.
PrayerPrayer
It is , therefore , most humbly prayed that your lordship be pleasedIt is , therefore , most humbly prayed that your lordship be pleased
to call for entire records of the case pertaining to the petitioner from theto call for entire records of the case pertaining to the petitioner from the
respondents , examine the same in detail and accept / allow this writrespondents , examine the same in detail and accept / allow this writ
petition and further be pleased to :-petition and further be pleased to :-
(I)(I) Issue an appropriate writ, order or directions in the nature of MandamusIssue an appropriate writ, order or directions in the nature of Mandamus
commanding the respondents thereof and thereby the action of thecommanding the respondents thereof and thereby the action of the
25
respondents in discontinuing the disability pension permanently of therespondents in discontinuing the disability pension permanently of the
petitioner w.e.f. 8petitioner w.e.f. 8thth February, 1956 may kindly be declare to be wholly February, 1956 may kindly be declare to be wholly
illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable. illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable.
(II)(II) Issue an appropriate writ, order or directions thereby respondents mayIssue an appropriate writ, order or directions thereby respondents may
kindly be directed to grant the disability pension to the petitioner w.e.f.kindly be directed to grant the disability pension to the petitioner w.e.f.
w.e.f. 8w.e.f. 8thth February, 1956 and pay the arrears thereof with 24% interest to February, 1956 and pay the arrears thereof with 24% interest to
the petitioner and also supply the copies of the relevant documents.the petitioner and also supply the copies of the relevant documents.
(III)(III) Issue an appropriate writ, order or directions thereby respondents mayIssue an appropriate writ, order or directions thereby respondents may
kindly be directed to grant the Service Element Pension to the petitionerkindly be directed to grant the Service Element Pension to the petitioner
w.e.f. 4.10.1945 and pay the arrears thereof with 24% interest to thew.e.f. 4.10.1945 and pay the arrears thereof with 24% interest to the
petitioner.petitioner.
(IV)(IV) Issue an appropriate writ, order or directions to the non- petitioners to payIssue an appropriate writ, order or directions to the non- petitioners to pay
compensation of Rs. 1, 50,000 /- to the petitioner for delaying payment ofcompensation of Rs. 1, 50,000 /- to the petitioner for delaying payment of
his disability pension w.e.f. 8his disability pension w.e.f. 8thth February, 1956 February, 1956
(V)(V) Issue such other writ, order or directions as may be deemed just andIssue such other writ, order or directions as may be deemed just and
proper by this Hon’ble court in the facts and circumstances of the case andproper by this Hon’ble court in the facts and circumstances of the case and
in favour at the petitioner.in favour at the petitioner.
(VI)(VI) Cost of the writ petitioner be awarded to the petitioner.Cost of the writ petitioner be awarded to the petitioner.
Jaipur.Jaipur. Humble petitioner Humble petitioner
Dated: Dated: Through her Counsel Through her Counsel
(Rohitashw Kajla, Anil Upmanyu)(Rohitashw Kajla, Anil Upmanyu)
Advocate. Advocate.
26
NOTES:NOTES:
1.1. That, this is a S.B. Civil Writ Petition and the virus of any Act orThat, this is a S.B. Civil Writ Petition and the virus of any Act or
Ordinance or Rules have not been challenged in this writ petition.Ordinance or Rules have not been challenged in this writ petition.
2.2. That petitioner has not filed any similar writ petition before this Hon’ bleThat petitioner has not filed any similar writ petition before this Hon’ ble
High Court or the Hon’ ble Supreme Court of India prior to this one.High Court or the Hon’ ble Supreme Court of India prior to this one.
3.3. That, PF, notices and extra sets shall be filed within the stipulated time asThat, PF, notices and extra sets shall be filed within the stipulated time as
per the orders of this Hon' ble court.per the orders of this Hon' ble court.
4.4. That, pie papers are not readily available hence this writ petition hasThat, pie papers are not readily available hence this writ petition has
been typed on stout papers.been typed on stout papers.
5.5. That, this writ petition has been typed by my private steno in my office itThat, this writ petition has been typed by my private steno in my office it
has not been typed any of the employees of this Hon' ble court.has not been typed any of the employees of this Hon' ble court.
Counsel for the PetitionerCounsel for the Petitioner
27
IIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHANN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPURAT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition NoS.B. Civil Writ Petition No……………………….…...……………….…...…………………………….…...……………….…...……/2009/2009
Smt. Jyana DeviSmt. Jyana Devi
VersusVersus
The Union of India & ors.The Union of India & ors.
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF WRIT PETITIONAFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF WRIT PETITION
I, I, Smt. Jyana Devi Age about 75 years, widow of Ex-Rfn No. 2078 LateSmt. Jyana Devi Age about 75 years, widow of Ex-Rfn No. 2078 Late
Shri Jagna Ram Resident of Vill. Marot P.o. Islampur, via Baggar, Tehsil &Shri Jagna Ram Resident of Vill. Marot P.o. Islampur, via Baggar, Tehsil &
Distt. - Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan – 333001. do hereby take oath and solemnlyDistt. - Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan – 333001. do hereby take oath and solemnly
affirm as under.affirm as under.
11.. That, I am the petitioner in the present case and am well conversant withThat, I am the petitioner in the present case and am well conversant with
the facts and circumstances of the case.the facts and circumstances of the case.
2.2. The annexed writ petition has been drafted by my Counsel on myThe annexed writ petition has been drafted by my Counsel on my
instructions and I have read over the contents thereof which has beeninstructions and I have read over the contents thereof which has been
explained to me in Hindi and I am fully satisfied thereof.explained to me in Hindi and I am fully satisfied thereof.
3.3. That, the contents of Para Nos. 1 to 43 along with grounds from (A) to (F)That, the contents of Para Nos. 1 to 43 along with grounds from (A) to (F)
of the annexed writ petition are true and correct to the best of my personalof the annexed writ petition are true and correct to the best of my personal
knowledge, records and legal advice.knowledge, records and legal advice.
DeponentDeponent
28
VERIFICATIONVERIFICATION
I, the above named deponent do hereby verify on oath and state that theI, the above named deponent do hereby verify on oath and state that the
contents of Para Nos. 1,2 and 3 of this affidavit are true and correct to thecontents of Para Nos. 1,2 and 3 of this affidavit are true and correct to the
best of my personal knowledge, records and legal advice, No. Part of it isbest of my personal knowledge, records and legal advice, No. Part of it is
false and nothing material has been concealed in it and no part of it isfalse and nothing material has been concealed in it and no part of it is
false. So help me God.false. So help me God.
JaipurJaipur
Dated:Dated:
Identified by: Identified by: DeponentDeponent
(Rohitashw Kajla, Anil Upmanyu) (Rohitashw Kajla, Anil Upmanyu)
Advocate Advocate
29
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHANIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPURAT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition NoS.B. Civil Writ Petition No……………………….…...……………….…...…………………………….…...……………….…...……/2009/2009
Smt. Jyana DeviSmt. Jyana Devi
VersusVersus
The Union of India & ors.The Union of India & ors.
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF DOCUMENTSAFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF DOCUMENTS
I, I, Smt. Jyana Devi Age about 75 years, widow of Ex-Rfn No. 2078 LateSmt. Jyana Devi Age about 75 years, widow of Ex-Rfn No. 2078 Late
Shri Jagna Ram Resident of Vill. Marot P.o. Islampur, via Baggar, Tehsil &Shri Jagna Ram Resident of Vill. Marot P.o. Islampur, via Baggar, Tehsil &
Distt. - Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan – 333001. do hereby take oath and solemnlyDistt. - Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan – 333001. do hereby take oath and solemnly
affirm as under.affirm as under.
1. That, I am the petitioner in the present case and am well acquainted1. That, I am the petitioner in the present case and am well acquainted
with the facts and circumstances of the case.with the facts and circumstances of the case.
2.2. That the annexed document Annexure No. 1 is Photostatted copy ofThat the annexed document Annexure No. 1 is Photostatted copy of
Discharge Certificate Dated 2.04.1986 and Annexure No. 4 and 18Discharge Certificate Dated 2.04.1986 and Annexure No. 4 and 18
are death certificate and notice for want of justice and remainingare death certificate and notice for want of justice and remaining
documents annexed to the writ petition is true and exactdocuments annexed to the writ petition is true and exact
Photostatted copy of their originals. Photostatted copy of their originals.
Deponent Deponent
30
VerificationVerification
I, the above named deponent do hereby make oath and verify thatI, the above named deponent do hereby make oath and verify that
the contents of Para Nos. 1 & 2 of this affidavit are true and correctthe contents of Para Nos. 1 & 2 of this affidavit are true and correct
to the best of my personal knowledge, records and legal advice. Noto the best of my personal knowledge, records and legal advice. No
part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed. So helppart of it is false and nothing material has been concealed. So help
me God.me God.
JaipurJaipur
Dated: DeponentDated: Deponent
Identified By:Identified By:
(Rohitashw Kajla, Anil Upmanyu) (Rohitashw Kajla, Anil Upmanyu)
AdvocateAdvocate
31
top related