(O&M) Commandant 30 Battalion, B.S.F., Jalandhar And ORS v. Ajmer Singh
!
""#$$%&'( )( #("*&+#&'
#(#,-#+ *& . / 0 ,*&*1&2#+ *&. 0 "$*%+#+ *&. 0 Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced? NO Whether full judgment is pronounced?
YES . 3!
+&'
", "- %"", . ( /
+ % *
*0 1"
%""2 3 4
3
+ '
2""""56
'
+
+ &
", "- %"",
. ( / 3
+
+
3
7
0 + '
+
+6
", "- %"", . ( / 3 '
+ - Per contra, 0 '
+
3 '
+ +
&
$ 9 %: "2 %"
' # + ;
.<; =6 5/ 8
>
::$ + ! '
::"
3
& '
'
4 * 0 3 *
'
' + + '
?
, '
?
+ 5 >
& &
+
+
? :
3@&
6 "32. In spite of the aforesaid provisions, the Pension Sanctioning Authority failed to notice that the Medical Board had not given any reason in support of its opinion, particularly when there is no note of such disease or disability available in the service record of the appellant at the time of acceptance for military service. Without going through the aforesaid facts the Pension Sanctioning Authority mechanically passed the impugned order of rejection based on the report of the Medical Board. As per Rules 5 and 9 of `Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982', the appellant is entitled for presumption and benefit of presumption in his favour. In absence of any evidence on record to show that the appellant was suffering from !
!" ! !#$!
%&"!& ' ((!(!))!&( )! !)!(*""
+!&!
$!(((!&&!"" (* $ &'
)" !
(") ( ((!(!!
(!
(! !)! !(!( !"( (,!
&")!$!( !)!
33. As per Rule 423(a) of General Rules for the purpose of determining a question whether the cause of a disability or death resulting from disease is or is not attributable to service, it is immaterial whether the cause giving rise to the disability or death occurred in an area declared to be a field service/active service area or under normal peace conditions. "Classification of diseases" have been prescribed at Chapter IV of Annexure I; under
/ paragraph 4 post traumatic epilepsy and other mental changes resulting from head injuries have been shown as one of the diseases affected by training, marching, prolonged standing etc. Therefore, the presumption would be that the disability of the appellant bore a casual connection with the service conditions.
34. In view of the finding as recorded above, we have no option but to set aside the impugned order passed by the Division Bench dated 31st July, 2009 in LPA No. 26 of 2004 and uphold the decision of the learned Single Judge dated 20th May, 2004. The impugned order is set aside and accordingly the appeal is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay the appellant the benefit in terms of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in accordance with law within three months if not yet paid, else they shall be liable to pay interest as per order passed by the learned Single Judge. No costs."
8
&6
3@&
&
'
+
A > > .< '/
'
+ '
4
'
'
'
% ?'
!
./
'
0
Saahil/Ayub Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No