Subash Chander v. Union Of India And Others

CWP-13078-2023 -12023:PHHC:082763

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-13078-2023 Date of Decision : 03.07.2023 Subash Chander ......... Petitioner

Versus

UOI and others ......... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present :

Ms. Chandni Bajaj, Advocate for Mr.Rajeev Anand, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Shivoy Dhir, Senior Panel Counsel for UOI. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL , J. (Oral) The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India is seeking directions to the respondents to consider his claim qua disability pension.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that in November 1988, while the petitioner was performing internal security duty at Aurangabad met with an accident and received injuries on occupital region of his head. Due to aforementioned traumatic injury, the petitioner was given treatment at Civil Hospital, Gaya and discharged after treatment. The petitioner during the course of medical treatment was diagnosed with disease psychoneurosis. The petitioner time to time was medically examined. On 04.03.2004, the petitioner was brought before Medical Board where he was declared to be in lowest medical category i.e. 50% disability. The petitioner suffered from infirmity during the course of performing his ANJU GOEL 2023.07.03 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-13078-2023 -22023:PHHC:082763 official duty, however, respondents have not extended pension accordingly. The petitioner has made representation dated 06.06.2022 (Annexure P-10) requesting the respondents to consider his claim towards disability pension, however, the respondents have neither adjudicated representation of the petitioner nor granted any benefit.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Shivoy Dhir, Senior panel counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents-UOI and submits that the competent authorities would look into the representation of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order within 06 weeks from today. He also pointed out that the petitioner made representation on 20.01.2011 and thereafter representation dated 06.06.2022 (Annexure P-10) has been made just to cover up the limitation and create right which prima facie seems to be time barred. In view of statement of learned counsel for the respondents and without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to adjudicate claim of the petitioner including question of limitation.

( JAGMOHAN BANSAL ) JUDGE 03.07.2023 anju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No ANJU GOEL 2023.07.03 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document