Ram Chander vs Union Of India And Others

Sr No,From/To,Medical Category,Unit,Diagnosis

(1),"09.07.07

23.12.07",A3 (T-24),5th Bh Ladakh Scouts,"Displaced Fracture base of

5th Metatrsal

(2),23.12.07,SHAPE-1,5th Bh Ladakh Scouts,-

(3),"13.03.18

27.08.18",P3 (T-24),2nd Bn Ladakh Scouts Regt,Gouty Arthritis

(4),"07.09.18

22.02.19",P2 (T-24),2nd Bn Ladakh Scouts,Gouty Arthritis

(5),"13.03.19

13.03.21",P2 (P),2nd Bn Ladakh Scouts Regt,Gouty Arthritis

authority to sanction discharge of ]COs/OR who are in Shape-2/3 after obtaining prior approval from the competent authority and recommendation,,,,

from Release Medical Board. Ladakh Scouts is an Infantry Regiment with four out of its five battalions required to be deployed in high altitude,,,,

area/extreme climatic conditions for specific operational tasks at very sensitive locations. The personnel serving with this Regiment are expected to,,,,

maintain high altitude acclimatization, required physical fitness and mental robustness to keep the battalions fighting fit at high altitude. Therefore, low",,,,

medical category personnel are discharged from service under the provisions of Rule 13 of the Army Rules following laid down specified procedure. It,,,,

was in these circumstances, the applicant, who was unable to perform normal military duties involving physical exertion in high altitude areas, was",,,,

considered to be discharged from service, there being no shelter employment available with the battalion.",,,,

It is true that a Naik is authorised to serve for 22 years of colour service, which is extendable up to 02 years, provided the individual remains in",,,,

permissible medical category and fulfils discipline criteria. The applicant was downgraded to the low medical category with effect from 13.03.2019,",,,,

therefore, he was to be discharged from service when he was downgraded to P2 (Permanent) category in accordance with Army Order No.46/1980,",,,,

Para 2(a) of which deals with ""Retention"". It states that the employment of permanent low medical category personnel, at all times, is subject to the",,,,

availability of suitable alternative appointments commensurate with their medical category and also to the proviso that this can be justified in the public,,,,

interest and that their retention will not exceed the sanctioned strength of the regiment/corps. When such an appointment is not available or when their,,,,

retention is either not considered necessary in the interest of the service or it exceeds the sanctioned strength of the regiment/corps, they will be",,,,

discharged irrespective of the service put in by them. It was in this regard, the learned counsel for the applicant relied on the decision in Rajpal Singh",,,,

(supra), wherein the question of law that was raised was that in accordance with Army Rule 13(3)I(ii) related to Junior Commissioned Officers, Rule",,,,

13(3)II(ii) related to Warrant Officers and Rule 13(3)III(iii) related to the category of persons enrolled under the Act who have been attested, which",,,,

is applicable in the case of the applicant, the discharge of personnel having been found medically unfit for further service has to be carried out only on",,,,

the recommendation of an Invaliding Medical Board. In the case on hand, this decision has no relevance, after the amendment to Rule 13 of the Army",,,,

Rules issued vide SRO No. 22 of 13.05.2010. Adhering to the above, the Release Medical Board in respect of the applicant had been carried out on",,,,

21.08.2019, which attributed his disability to military service entitling him to get disability pension, in addition to service pension.",,,,

The competent authority issued the impugned order of discharge with effect from 31.12.2019 after following the relevant rules and regulations. On,,,,

discharge from service, the applicant will be granted service and disability element of pension. In these circumstances, we are not inclined to accept",,,,

the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant would be put to irreparable loss if he is not allowed to continue in service.,,,,

Resultantly, the instant OA fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs.",,,,

Pronounced in open Court on this the 22nd day of January 2020.,,,,