t- t\ . I- ,F IN TFIE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHT aallzQaS- t*o{zg_og*. rllg@. ra+s -ooe. _tzzoqqqg,491q1?qgp,?@ zoerlzooe -6z+E6od i-826,26?tr )cAa rlnno -r --^ "ooe, 008, t47 g_1+?t?o gt, oge +Pgq. - gg qg, ^ oo g+8?t,2_og+ 99ori?ggz, 88011?ggz. gnr,rlr o, ?tlu?go!, ert1/3_oE, ?t6:4 2?!A_'?9a7. ssTgt?997, .e6r8i oT, 96?s,1?gg?, ,648/10 3 z g i?9 9 9. z g orz o g=e . : 4:012, 0, g a@ 0 0 e r s s z,z o o e. ,sg4/?goq 5i3'2gqg. !?1 !11r?999, ?6ztzggg, s_qg14oo ooe, ' eqqzooa. sez/zooa, g20l2ooB- 93 1_ 999/?999, e7 o/2 g=oq.= gzti +gz1{?099, 1119{?ggg. 11 e. +1191?999. tuqg12q9q, +992t3gqg, 768=?4?999. +!?74?99q - L71e_/= uz91rg0q, t9zq42 ??9=r1?ggg a:q?'?ggg o ^oog oe, 37 +7 t2OO8. 37 84t2OO8. WP (C) No.5946 of 2007 and.other connected matters Page 7 of 8 Signing Date:02.07.2024 16:20:19 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified r Through: Major K. Ramesh, Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, Ms. Neelam Rathore, cor. s.R. Karkar, Mr. Rajeev Anand, Mr. c.M. Khanna, Mr. Viraj R. Datar, Col. C.f. Sharma, Col. A.S. Chauhan, Mr. n,ohan Kumar, Mr, N.L. Sarela, Ur. Hitender sakkarwar, Mr.sudhir Mittar, Mr. EJ. Vrigi.,"rl, Mr. Kurjiwan Goyar, Mr. Arok Kishor, Mr. rurioan (urii, Mr. Anil Kumar pandey, Mr. Rajeev Anand, Mr. e.p. . shukla, !rr. s.rr4. Darar, Mr. D.s. kauntae, Mr.soumyajit . Pani, Dr.Alok K.Sharma, Mr.R.D.Tybgi, CJptii" K.M.saxena, Ms. Rekha paili with wrs. punirn-singh, '. Mr. s.L. Kumar with Mr..B.K. Ahruwaria, cor.s.s.c'nrr'awat, Mr' A.K. Bakshi with Mr. Romesh Gautam, Ms.Bandana Shukla,. Mr.R.K.Sharma, Mr.Aagnev i.ii" &- M;:Ab;ik Kumar, Mr.M.S.Sasan, Dr.R.slsaian, Mr.A.K.Tri;"di; Ms.Jag.rati . singh for Mr. M.K.Bhardwaj, nar.s.r,rumar, Mr.B.V.K,Ahluwalia and Ms.Rita Hingmang, SUBEDAR(SKT) PUTTAN LAL AND OTHER CONNECTED PETITIONERS . .. PETtTtON ER(S) Advocates for the petitioners. Versus ...RESPONDENTS UNION OF INDIA & ORS, Through: WP (C) No,59 6 of 2OOZ ond other connect)d motters Mr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Mr. Manoj Ohri, Mr. Hemant Gupta, Mr. Puneet. Khurana, Vts.tr,tonica daig,'pf r.Sf.,.ti. Hasan, Mr.Amiet Andley, Mr. Saroj giOaw"at, 'iof . R. Balasubiamaniam,Mr. Aakash pralap, Ms.' Barkha Babbar, Ms. Sonia Mathur, Mr. pankaj Batra, Mr, nnil Gautam, Mr. M.M. Beg,. Mr. Saleem Ahmed,'lr4s.Shilpa Singh, Mr.Yogesh Varma, Mr.prakash krr.r, Poge 2 of 8 l") LI .1 Mr.Jaswinder Singh, Ms. ,ygn,I: Garg, Mr. Gaurav hi l",ii I " ff,i,.l "^ii:ffi I il ff{J '1y ff Tn: ;,, ;, ;,,. ;; tvls.jyoti Singh, Mr. Ankur Chhi - Mr'Pankaj Batra, Mr. sareem Ahmed with wtr. Habibur Rahman, \lr,.S.an19.y Katyat with Mr. nan;eei fr*uilti-' Mr. Vikas Sethi wiilr Ms. ManinderncnJr'Va,- Mr. Rajan Sabharwal with Ms. Seema Bhidauriya, Mr. pushkar Sood with Mr. Varun Kathuria, Mr. Sewa Ram with Mr. R,K. Bachchan, Mr. Dalip Mehra with Mr. Rajiv nanjjn fvfishra, Mr' Jai Bansar and Mr. Vivek-singh,'Advocates, proxy for Ms. Madhu Sharan, Mr. Sanjay katyal, Mr. R'V. sinha, Mr. A.s. singh and Mr.puneet Khurana, Advocates arong with coioner G.s.Aur and_.tuaior's.s. . Advocates for the Respondents. CORAM: , H9N'BLE NlR. JUSTTCE SANJAY K|SHAM,.AUL HON'BLE IVIR. JUSTICE MOOL CHAND GARG 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? 5AI{IAY KISHAN KAUL, I. (ORAL) 1' The common question lvhich arises for consideration in this batclr of petitions is as.to wlreilrer an army personnel could have been discharged from service without holding the Invaliding Medical Board (,lMB, for short). A Division Bench of this court had held against the respondents against which the respondents preferred a special Leave petition. since the Hon'ble supreme court.was seized of the matter, it issued directions that this court should stay its hand till the authoritative pronouncement . of the supreme court is available on this aspect. we may also note that interim orders vv'ere granted by this court, but the supreme court vacated the interim orders and in view thereof a general WF (C) I'to.5946 oI 2OO7 ond other cannected matters Poge 3 ol 8 I I( interim order was passed by this court on 14.05.200g keeping in mind the orders passed bv the supreme court whereby the benefit of stay was restricted to the service personnel continuing in the accommodation provided by the Army, 2. The supreme court has delivered.a judgment in civir Appeal No'6587/2008 in Union of rndia & ors v. Rajpar sinqh on 07.11.2008, The question which has been decided has been succinctly set out in para 2 of the order itself as to whether the holcJing of an IMB is a condition precedent for discharge of a Juniclr Comrnissioner Of'ficer (,JCO,) on' account of low medical category. 3' we may add here that this principle would actually apply not .only to the JCos alone, but also to all the personnel Below Officers Rank ('pBORs, for short). . The conclusion of the supreme court is that the High court was correct in holding that the PBoRs could not be clischarged from service without holding an tMB. 4. The resuii of the aforesaid judgment is that all the present petitions are liable to be allowed. 5. we have heard the counsel for the parties for purposes of concluding as to what directions are required to be passed in the present petitions. The following directions are accordingly issued: i) The order passed by the chief of Army staff dated 12.04,2007 directing discharge of 'att the personnel in Low Medical category without horcring the rMB is quashed. ii) The petitioners who stand discharged as a consequence of the aforesaid order are entiiled to be reinstated with all WP (C) fta.59f5 of 200i' ond otlter connected motters IrnnF A ^f I ,R . consequential'benefits including continuity of service, pay and 1 Y allowances and seniority as per the rulesr.-. -...---.-_.--. iii) The petitioners wourd report to their respective Regimental Centre from where they have been discharged . within a period of 30 days from today for joining\ The pay and allowances and other n66rits to such of the petitioners who have not been paid the pension and retiral benefits including by AGIF arising from the discharge order wiil be remitted . witnin a maximum period of three months from tod'ay. ' Naturally, this. v'rould be applicable only to such of tne petitioners who join within the aforesaid time. . iv) . There are certain petitioners who have been paid pension, , AGIF and if they seek to re-join naturally they have to refund.the amount. However, 'they are .: also entitlgQ to oe pirio lhe ngv a;o-1r1gw-a,l.ggs..{hus only the . ., . -,:... r.s3-. ,.^i..:., ,....,,: ....... :.....,; .r- .; ....:,:_:i,.!..,'ii,,#,a*$Ji:,r., : , .,.,.,-. .r,:,i. ,..1 . . -.'. .. ', n et.aiiib y :i h b s.i? p d :,rgtyii u"g oV,in :,;;t15a;i"! p o h o.,ntr. w i r i 'l ', '. -.:.1' :' .' . , : ',:...:. : ". " infoim such p'ersons about ilietn'bt''a'mbunt which has to be ':' refunded back by them and the amount be remitted by such persons within 30 days of intimation :of the amount to be remitted back by them. ' -.' v) In respect of aforesaid direction.(iv), if.the balance .amountis.notremittedbacktotherespondents,itwi|lbe ' . deemed that such petitioners have accepted their discharge. vi) In case of the. petitioners who hdve not been discharged, . naturally the occas.ion'to'discharge them now.would not arise without holding the tMB. wP (c) No,59a6 oJ 2007 ond other cdnnected motters Poge 5 of 8 ' vii)The respondents are not precluded from holding the lMBs :--after sue.h.ieiining in accordance with law as per the Army Act, 1950, The Army Rures, 1954 and Army Instiuctions. viii) In view of the passage of time from the date of discharge till the date of rejoining, it will be open to the respondents to carry out any police 'verification " as . may be deemed appropriate by the responderrts. 6. We would have disposed of all these writ petitions with the aforesaid directions alone, but we are conscious of the fact ' that there are a large number of personnel who have been discharged under the policy which has been held to be illegal ^ by the Supreme Court, This has already started resulting in a . spate of petitions befbre this Court. Such policy decision was ' taken on 1,2.04.2007 arrd is in proximity of time. ln order to - give option to such orf gr persons qho- may not frave - approached the Court till now arising as a conseqrience of the judgment of the supreme court and to avoid such unnecessary. spate. of litigation before this court, it has - become necessary to issue certain further general directions even in respect of the pBoRs who have not approached any court till date. This is not onry in the interest of such persons but also ih the interest of the respondents and to avoid unnecessary. huge litigation. 7 Insofar as . the aforesaid. persons are concerned, the fcillowing directions are issued: i) Individual options wiil be sent by the respondents to such persons within two months making an offer''to them to rejoin if they so desire as per the aforesaid directions passed in the WP (C) No.59 6 of 2OO7 ond other connected motters Poge 6 of I present writ petitions. The option letter will indicate that such 4 option has to be exercised within a period of 30 days of the recelpt of the letter -an* in case the retiral and pensionary benefits have been paid to them, such persons must rejoin along with the amount liable to be refunded by them to the respondents which shall also be indicated in the option letter. ii) The respondents will also give a public"notice/advertisement apart from issuing the individual notice in a suitable manner preferably in national newspapers' iii)lt is made clear that such persons will also be governgd by all the directions made in respect of the petitioners herein insofar as applicable. .iv)The general directions are applicable only to such of the persons *ho have been discharged or proposed to be discharged under the policy letter dated 12.04,2007 or those who may have been discharged earlier but have already approached the competent court by filing a petition v)lt is pointed out that there may be certain PBORS, which may also include some petitioners, whose normal date of superaRnuation has already arrived or would arrive before the aforesaid option is issued. ln such cases, the persons would be entitled to only the benefit of pay and allowances for the differential period after adjusting any additional benefit arising from the premature discharge. Needless to say that those who decide not to rejoin after their premature diScharge would neither be entitled to any pay and allowances nor would be required to repay the amount, if any, paid to them after their premature discharge. WP (C) No.5945 of 2007 ond other connected motters Poge z of A 1r The petitions stand allowed with the aforesaid directions. CM 77112008 in WP(C)389/2008 In view of the disposal of the writ application does not survive for consideration stands disposed of. NOVEMBER 20, 2OOB dm petition, the and the same WP (C) No.5946 of 20O7 ond other connected motters Page 8 of 8