LPA No. 5 of 2007 9.1.2008 Present: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General Of India, for the applicant-appellant. Ms. Sulochna Kaundal, counsel for the respondent. CMP(M) No. 282 of 2007 For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of. LPA No. 5 of 2007 The learned Single Judge, by means of the impugned judgment, has given the following directions:- “1. The petitioner be treated to have continued in service upto the date when he would have completed 28 years of service, i.e. 3.5.1998, and be paid salary and all other allowances etc. from 16.5.1997 to the said date. 2. On and with effect from the day next following the date on which the petitioner would have completed 28 years of service, i.e. 4.5.1998, he be treated to have voluntarily retired under the relevant provisions of Civil Services Pension Rules, 1972 and given the benefits of Rule 48-B and pension and retrial benefits be paid to him accordingly, from such date. 3. Arrears of salary, in accordance with direction No.1, and arrears of retrial benefits, in terms of direction No. 2, be paid to the petitioner within three months with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum.” We have heard Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant General of India, for the appellant and Ms. Sulochna Kaundal, learned counsel for the private respondent. The undisputed facts are that respondent Bhisham Singh was serving as Constable in the Indo Tibet Border Police (ITBP). It is admitted that in the year 1971 he suffered injury to his left eye during the course of duty. This injury, however, did not cause any immediate loss of vision, but 9 years later in December, 1980 he suffered loss of vision in the left eye. The respondent was treated, but he could not regain the loss of vision in the left eye. Thereafter the respondent was examined by a Medial Board in December, 1983 and though he was found to be unfit for combatant duty and was placed in category BEE (P), he was found fit to discharge non combatant general duty. He continued to perform these duties till the year 1996. In August, 1996 he was again examined by the Medical Board. The Medical Board did not find any deterioration in his vision as compared to 1983. However, the specialist opined that the respondent was not even fit to hold the post of non combatant constable. In the meantime, the respondent made a request that he may be permitted to continue till 3rd May, 1988 and thereafter he would seek voluntary retirement since that would entitle him to full pension as per the rules. The learned Single Judge held, and in our opinion rightly, that when the employee had served as non combatant constable from 1983 to 1996 and had discharged his duties without any complaint and there was admittedly no deterioration in his eye sight during this period, there was no reason to discharge him from service. Mr. Sandeep Sharma has strenuously urged that there is alternative remedy of a statutory appeal available. That may be so. However, the writ petition was filed in the year 2000 and has been disposed of after 6 years in 2006. The L.P.A. has also been pending for 9 months and at this stage it would not be proper for us to direct the respondent to file an appeal. There is no merit in the appeal which is accordingly dismissed. ( Deepak Gupta ), J. January 9, 2008(K) ( V. K. Ahuja ), J.