Pritam Singh vs Union of India

T.S. Doabia, J.—The petitioner was enrolled in the Indian army on 16th June 1976. He was invalided out of service w.e.f. 5th July 1983.

This was on the ground that he was suffering from `Schizophrenic Psychosis Catatonic295, His disability was assessed at 30% but he was not

allowed pension on the ground that this disease is not attributable to army service.

The petitioner submits that he was possessing a good physique and was robust in his youth. He was medically declared fit at the time of his

induction in the army. At that point of time, no entry was made with regard to his physical condition. What is sought to be projected is that he was

not suffering from the disease in question at the time of entry into service. It was after about seven years of service in the army that he acquired this

disease. It is accordingly submitted that as he was not suffering from the disease at the time of his entry into service and as he came to be

discharged from service on account of the above ailment, he should be held entitled to disability pension.

The fact that the petitioner was hale and hearty and did not suffer from the aforementioned disease at the time of joining the army service is not

being disputed. It is, however, submitted that in certain cases of genital heredity, this disease generates even after an individual has joined the

service and, therefore, in such cases, the entitlement of disability pension is not permissible unless it is clearly asserted that the cause of generation

of disease is only because of army service. Such is the stand taken by the Union of India.

If this is the position, then the Union of India was supposed to establish that the disease from which the petitioner is suffering is hereditary in

nature. It was for the Union of India to bring on record that somebody from the family members of the petitioner was suffering from this ailment.

The proforma which was filled by the Medical Board and which led to invaliding of the petitioner out of service, does not make any mention of the

fact that the family of the petitioner was suffering from the disease in question. The summary of the case as prepared in the case of the petitioner is

being reproduced below :

Did the disability/ies exist before entering service ? No

Disability : Schizophrenic Psychosis Catatonic295

A Constitutional disorder

A perusal of the above would negative the suggestion made by the learned counsel for Union of India that there was some problem in the family of

the petitioner. As such, the plea put forward by the counsel for the Union of India cannot be accepted. As a matter of fact, this aspect of the matter

has been considered in the case of Union of India v. Rattan Lal, 1999(2) SCT 39, wherein it has been observed as under :

(i) that in case mention is not made regarding the disease or disablement at the time of entry in service, then it is to be presumed that the disability

occurred during the course of service;

(ii) that the disability would be on account of stress and strains of army service;

(iii) if the competent authority is to disagree with the finding recorded by the medical board visavis the disability or the percentage thereof, the

matter should be referred to the Medical Board;

(iv) as there is no finding recorded that the respondentwrit petitioner was suffering from a disease which could not be detected at the time of entry

into service, the appellantUnion of India cannot take a somersault and come to a contrary conclusion;

(v) delay in approaching the Court is irrelevant.

Whatever has been stated above would apply to the facts of this case also. As there was no mention of any disease at the time of entry of the

petitioner in service, it can safely be concluded that the disease on account of which the petitioner was invalided out of service occurred due to

stress and strain of the army service.

With regard to the disease of Schizophrenia, a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Balwant Singh v. Union of India, LPA 521/98

decided on 17th November 1999 has expressed an opinion that even this disease can be acquired on account of hazards of army service. In the

above case, reference has been made to a decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which deals with the ailment of `Neurosis'. The Punjab

and Haryana High Court allowed disability pension. This decision is reported as Gurmukh Singh v. Union of India, 1999(3) SCT 139. Therefore,

what has been said by the Division Bench of this Court visavis disease of Schizophrenia and also interpretation made regarding the disease of

Neurosis by the Punjab and Haryana High Court would apply to the facts of this case also.

The Karnataka High Court in the case of Ex. Naik M.S. Pemmaiah v. Union of India, 1998(3) SCT 755 had allowed the disability pension

where the concerned employee was suffering from Schizophrenia. In the aforementioned decision, the reasoning given is that if a person was not

suffering from the disease when he joined the service and when there was no entry that the person was suffering from any disorder or disability then

it is to be presumed that the disease had occurred on account of stress and strain of army service and the same is attributable to Military service.

The petitioner is accordingly held entitled to pension. Let this be released within a period of two months front the date, a copy of this order is made

available to the respondent authorities as also to the counsel who has put in appearance on their behalf. The petitioner is also held entitled to

interest. The rate of interest would be 12%. In case the pension is not released within the aforementioned period, then the petitioner would be

entitled to interest at the rate of 15% and this enhanced interest would be payable by the person on whose account the delay occurs.

Disposed of accordingly.