IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2008 / 23RD ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3664 of 2008(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ANUSH M.S., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.MOHANAN, AMBALATHUMKULANGARA, KOOTTIKKADA, MAYYANAD. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SMT.R.LEELA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, PHQ P.O., NEW DELHI. 2. THE COMMANDER, SIVAJI TRAINING COMPANY, GRC KAMPTEE, NAGPUR, MAHARASHTRA. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE JOSEPH, ADDL.CGSC FOR R.1,2 SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. GIRI, J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 3664 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner was enrolled as INF SOLGD in the unit of the Guards Regimental Center, Kamptee. with effect from 10.11.2004 and while undergoing training, he developed pain in his knee. He was examined and was found that he had been subjected to a surgery before his enrolment in the Army. The petitioner was subjected to a medical examination once again. The Medical Board examined him and as per Ext.R2(a) it was found that he was unfit to go further military training. He was therefore recommended for invalidation out of service in the light of the medical certificates. That has been challenged in this writ petition. 2. A counter affidavit and a statement have been filed on behalf of the respondents. 3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there has been inadequate evaluation of the petitioner's situation, following a complaint filed by him that he developed pain on his right knee. The petitioner was discharged from service and the disability is either attributable to the military service or at least WPC.3664 /2008 2 aggravated by the service. It was contended that the petitioner should at least have been given disability pension if not alternate employment. I am unable to accept the contention. Admittedly the petitioner had undergone surgery in his knee a few years ago. Apparently, normal activities did not have any impact on his condition. But when he was subjected to the strenuous training required in the Army, it caused an impact on the knee, which had been subjected to a surgery earlier. The opinion given by the members of the committee who examined him is evidenced by Ext.R2(a). It is not a case where the petitioner had developed a problem for the first time, on account of the military service, nor can it be said to be a case where an illness is aggravated by the military service. It seems to be a case where the petitioner had a disability, which rendered him unfit to undertake military service as such. This was detected at the stage of his preliminary training. The respondents cannot be faulted from invalidating him out of service . For all these reasons I do not find any merit in the writ petition. It is dismissed. V. GIRI, JUDGE. Pmn/ WPC.3664 /2008 3