Rajinder Singh vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Bashir A. Kirmani, J.—Briefly stated, petitioner's case is that he was enrolled in Indian Army on 1.10.1969 and after having served for 7

years and 10 months suffered disablement due to electrocution while on leave at home; where after he rejoined the service and on reference to

Medical Board, the disablement suffered, as aforesaid, was found to be of permanent nature and he was discharged from service on 6.8.1977 but

disability pension to which he was entitled under rules was not granted in his favour despite requests. Aggrieved there by, he seeks issuance of

mandamus directing respondents to release disability pension in his favour on the grounds that the said pension was due to him and the delay

involved in demanding the same would not come in his way, because the same is attributable to laches on part of respondents; and that having

served the Army with distinction, earning him awards and medals, he could not have been discriminated against, the way it has been done.

In their objections respondent-Union of India have pleaded that since petitioner's case for disability pension was rejected as far back as in

October 1977, against which he did not choose to file any appeal, his prayer for grant of same to him at this point of time grossly suffered from

laches and could not be considered as such. They have also pleaded that disability due to electrocution was suffered by petitioner while on annual

leave, which could not be attributed to military service nor could it be said to have been aggravated thereby and, finally, that because he failed to

file an appeal before competent authority in terms of the Act, the petition was not maintainable. Materials submitted along with the memo of

objections include Medical Board's certificates/opinions in respect of petitioner, on basis whereof he was discharged from service.

During course of submissions learned Counsel for parties have, besides reiterating the contents of their respective pleadings, also referred to

annexures etc. and canvassed their respective contentions.

I have heard leaned counsel and considered the matter. Facts, in so far they are relevant for consideration of the case, are almost admitted. That

the petitioner was duly employed in the Army and discharged therefrom on account of medically certified disability suffered by him due to

electrocution and that no disability allowance was paid to him is admitted by respondents, while the fact that after aforesaid electrocution he was

not fully fit to serve in the Army, whereupon he was discharged, against which did not prefer any appeal, is not denied by petitioner. That the

electrocution and consequent disability was caused to petitioner when he was on annual leave at his home is also not disputed. Thus, the moot

question is whether or not the electrocution suffered by petitioner, admittedly at his house while he was on leave, can in attending circumstance of

the matter be deemed to have been caused due to military service.

Before proceeding ahead it would be appropriate to notice that under rules/regulations governing the matter, the disability pension can be

granted to an individual invalidated from service on account of disability attributable to or aggravated by military service and is not less then 20%

and for the disability to be accepted as having been caused due to military service, the same has to be attributable thereto or aggravated thereby

etc., and that it was so has to be shown by establishing a causal connection between the alleged disablement and the military service. In the instant

case, however, the claimed case of disability is admittedly electrocution stated to have been suffered by petitioner while on leave at his residence.

That being so, the disability suffered by petitioner does not appear to have a direct causal connection with military service, because, for being so, it

has to be the direct result of thereof. The fact that during his leave period petitioner would be deemed to have been in service, does perhaps not

favourably agitate on his side for the reason that the connection, as aforesaid between the alleged disability and the military service, is not apparent.

Fiddling with electric wirings or appliances while one is enjoying leave at home can certainly not be deemed to be a part of the military service and

in that view the petitioners' claim does not appear to have any substance, and also suffers from laches, not explained in any court whatsoever.

Accordingly, the petition does not appear to have any force, and is therefore dismissed alongwith connected C.M.Ps.