Skip to content


Hari Singh Vs. the Union of India, Through the Secretary and Others - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtArmed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Jaipur
Decided On
Case NumberTransferred Application No.42 of 2009
Judge
AppellantHari Singh
RespondentThe Union of India, Through the Secretary and Others
Excerpt:
army act - section 20 read with army rules, 1954 - rule 17 -.....hospital of the government of rajasthan at jaipur, therefore, a request was made for arranging a medical board to ascertain about disability of the applicant about the disease from which he was suffering. the non-applicants, in their reply have admitted the fact of the applicants joining of territorial army and rendering of 6 years 11 months 12 days service. it was submitted that the applicant was never reported sick during his embodied period of service and he was never admitted in the hospital and when he was called for embodied service on 10.2.2000 then he remained absent, as a result of which, he was declared deserted. a court of inquiry was also conducted after lapse of three years. it was further submitted that since he never reported sick during his embodied period of service,.....
Judgment:

BY THE TRIBUNAL :

The applicant, Hari Singh filed a writ petition for grant of disability pension with effect from 10.2.200 before Honble Rajasthan High Court, which stood transferred to this Tribunal for adjudication.

Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was enrolled in the Territorial Army (Grendiers) on 22.5.1990 and was dismissed from service on 10.2.2000 under Sec.20 of the Army Act read with Rule 17 of the Army Rules, 1954 on the ground of remaining absent from duty. It was submitted that the applicant was the patient of “Schizophrenia” and he got his treatment from a Psychiatric of the Hospital of the Government of Rajasthan at Jaipur, therefore, a request was made for arranging a Medical Board to ascertain about disability of the applicant about the disease from which he was suffering.

The non-applicants, in their reply have admitted the fact of the applicants joining of Territorial Army and rendering of 6 years 11 months 12 days service. It was submitted that the applicant was never reported sick during his embodied period of service and he was never admitted in the Hospital and when he was called for embodied service on 10.2.2000 then he remained absent, as a result of which, he was declared deserted. A court of inquiry was also conducted after lapse of three years. It was further submitted that since he never reported sick during his embodied period of service, no claim for grant of disability pension is made out.

We have heard Mr. Pyarelal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sanjay Pareek, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mrs.Anupama Chaturvedi, for the non-applicants and have carefully gone through the relevant record of the case. Learned counsel for the applicant has pleaded that the applicant was dismissed under Sec.20 of the Army Act, 1954, no due procedure as provided under Rule 17 of the Army Rules, 1954 was followed by the concerned authorities as they have not issued show cause notice to the applicant before dismissing him from service. More-so, the applicant was suffering from the disease “Schizophrenia” and he got his treatment from the Government Hospital. Therefore, he should have been subjected to invaliding Medical Board or Release Medical Board by the concerned authorities, which was never done in the case of the applicant.

Learned counsel for the non-applicants argued that the applicant was never reported sick during his embodied period of service and was never admitted in the Hospital. However, when he was called for embodied service but he did not join his service. Thereafter, the applicant was declared as deserter. In the present case, the concerned authorities have rightly followed the procedure as provided under Sec.20 of the Army Act read with Rule 17 of the Army Rules, 1954. If a simple prescription is issued by a private Hospital, it cannot be inferred that the particular person was suffering from a particular specific disease unless it was certified by the officer on the basis of his medical examination. Thus, no case for grant of disability pension is made out.

It is true that the applicant was never reported sick during his entire embodied service as is revealed from the Record of Service and Sheet-roll of the applicant. It nowhere finds mention that the applicant was ever admitted in the Government Hospital or examined by any Medical Officer for the disease “Schizophrenia”. If during embodied service, the applicant had obtained a prescription of any disease, he should have immediately reported to the concerned authorities but this was not done, as such, he was not subjected to Invaliding Medical Board or Release Medical Board. However, the concerned authorities after holding the court of enquiry have rightly followed the procedure and have given show cause notice to the deserter whose whereabouts are not known. A court of enquiry was held after lapse of three years and thereafter the applicant was dismissed from service under Sec.39(b) of the Army Act w.e.f. 10.2.2000. In absence of any particular document, a claim for holding Release Medical Board cannot be ordered to be held.

We do not find any claim for grant of disability pension to the applicant. The application lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed.

The Transferred Application is dismissed with no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //