LPA No.97/2011(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.97/2011(O&M) In CWP No.14255/2009 Date of decision:7.2.2011. Union of India and others .............Appellants v Ex.(TS)Nk. Harminder Singh ..............Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Ms.Renu Bala Sharma,Advocate for the appellants. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M.Kumar,J. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 14.9.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge while granting the benefit of disability pension to the petitioner-respondent. 2. It has come on record that the petitioner-respondent was suffering from permanent Affective Psychosis and was accordingly boarded out of service on that account. His disability was assessed at 20% for life. The learned Single Judge has also recorded a categoric finding that the disability was aggravated by stress and strain of the LPA No.97/2011(O&M) 2 military service. Before the learned Single Judge, the appellant-Union of India has conceded that the controversy was covered by a judgment of this Court in Ex.Recruit Jagjit Singh v. Union of India and others (CWP No.1687 of 2002) decided on 31.5.2006. 3. Ms.Renu Bala Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant- Union of India has sought to argue that the disability in fact was less than 20%. The aforesaid ground is pleaded in para 4 of the Memo of Appeal. The averments made do not disclose what is the exact percentage but it merely say that it is 15-19% or less than 20%. There is neither any document for the aforesaid averment nor anything could be shown to us at the time of hearing. The averment is wholly vague and we are constrained to reject the same. On the contrary, the petitioner-respondent has asserted categorically in his appeal filed before authorities that disability was assessed at 30% (P5) for life and the opinion of the Medical Board was clear to the effect that his disability was aggravated by stress and strain of the military service. In the order rejecting his appeal on 24.9.2008 (P6) no such ground has been put forward. Therefore, we are of the view that this plea which has been put forward not only is vague but has no factual basis to stand. 4. There is no ground to entertain the appeal which is hereby dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge 7.2.2011. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge