IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.1549/2007 Reserved on.7.3.2008 Decided on.3.4.2008 Om Pavitar Dixit. …Petitioner. Versus Union of India and others. …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1. No. For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents Ms. Minakashi Pathania, Central Government Counsel. Rajiv Sharma, J. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the petitioner was enrolled in the Army in the year 1992. He was discharged on 31st August, 2000. It appears from the record that the case of the petitioner for disability pension was turned down on 9.5.2003. He preferred an appeal before the competent authority. The appeal was rejected on 10th November, 2006. He preferred an application assailing the order dated 10th November, 2006 on 31st May, 2007. He was informed by the Records Officer on 13th August, 2007 that the Appeal Medical Board has regarded his both the disabilities viz “HEMAPARESIS and FRACTURE COLLES (RT) AMB” as neither attributable nor aggravated by military service. Hence no further action was taken in this matter. Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate had strenuously argued that the petitioner was entitled to get the disability pension. He also contended that the copy of the injury report as well as court of inquiry was supplied to 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 the competent authority pursuant to letter dated 28th September, 2001. He also contended that his client had suffered 80% disability. Ms. Minakashi Sharma, Central Government Counsel had supported the decision taken by the respondents. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. The Court had directed the respondents on 9.1.2008 to produce the entire record pertaining to the case. The entire record was produced by the respondents through Havaldar Putu Pandia. The Court had perused the entire record more particularly pertaining to the opinion of the medical board. It appears from the record that the case of the petitioner for disability pension was rejected on 9.5.2003. He preferred an appeal to the appellate authority against order dated 9.5.2003 on 12.6.2003. He re- submitted his appeal by placing on record additional documents. He was directed to make himself available before the Medical Board on any working day vide letter dated 16.3.2005. The First Appeal Medical Board was conducted at Base Hospital, Delhi Cantt. on 13th February, 2006. On the basis of the opinion rendered by the Medical Board, the case of the petitioner for disability pension was rejected. The petitioner had suffered HEMAPARESIS (RT) on 27.9.1996. He suffered FRACTURE COLLES (RT) on 6.10.1998. He suffered his first ailment when he was posted in Delhi and he suffered the second injury while serving at Trivandrum. It is evident from the record of the First Appeal Medical Board that the petitioner has suffered HEMAPARESIS (RT) while he was serving in peace station. The Medical Board has opined that there was no close association between on set of the disease and the petitioner’s service. Qua the FRACTURE COLLES (RT), the Medical Board had opined that 3 the same was not sustained in performance of duty and the petitioner had fallen down from the cot while sleeping. The disability of the petitioner for HEMAPARESIS (RT) has been assessed at 80% for life and for sustaining FRACTURE COLLES (RT) injury, the same has been assessed at 15- 19%. The composite assessment for all disabilities has been assessed at 90% for life. It will be apt at this stage to take note of para 173 of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 (Part-I), which reads thus “Entitlement to disability pension arises only when the individual invalided out from service due to any disease or disability which considered as attributable to or aggravated by military service in non-battle casualty and is assessed 20% or over.” It is thus evident that as per para 173 of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 (Part-I) individual would be entitled to disability pension if he is invalided out from service due to any disease or disability which is considered as attributable or aggravated by military service in non-battle casualty and is assessed 20% or more. In the present case it has come in the opinion of the First Appeal Medical Board that the disability suffered by the petitioner is neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. The petitioner might have suffered disability of 80% for life for disease HEMAPARESIS (RT) and 15-19% for FRACTURE COLLES (RT), but since it has come conclusively in the opinion of the Medical Board that there is no close connection between the disease and injury with the petitioner’s service; the petitioner is not entitled to disability pension. Consequently, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs. ( Rajiv Sharma), Judge April 3, 2008 *Awasthi*