IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8359 of 2009 Between: J. Lakshmana Rao (15323928 F) S/o. Sri J. Lakshmana Rao R/o. C/o. Chyinni Markendayulu, 26th Ward, H.No. 7C-17-36, Eastern Street, Eluru 1, W.G. District - 534 001. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Officer Incharge Records Office Madras Engineer Group, Abhishek Karyalaya, Bangalore - 900 493. 2 The Director PS-4(d) AG's Branch Integrated HQ of MoD (Army), DHQ-PO., New Delhi - 110 011. 3 Sr. Accounts Officer O/o. Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (P), Allahabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.VEMURI VENKATESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents:MR. JAGADEESWARA REDDY FOR MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner, a Sepoy in the Military Service, was discharged from service as he was found unfit to be continued in service due to his integrated disabilities of DM Type-II and Persistent Mood Disorder. His application for sanctioning Disability Pension in terms of Regulation 179 of Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961, was rejected by respondent No.1 vide letter, dated 29.01.2007 on the ground that the disorders were found to be neither attributable to nor aggravated by Military Service. In the said letter itself, the petitioner was informed that if he is aggrieved by the said rejection, he is entitled to file an appeal, within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of the letter. The petitioner filed appeal on 22.02.2008 and the said appeal was dismissed on 11.03.2008 on the ground that the same was filed beyond the period of limitation. Having considered the facts of the case, I am of the view that as the claim of the petitioner pertains to Disability Pension, respondent No.1 ought to have made a liberal approach in entertaining the appeal filed beyond the period of limitation. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, order, dated 11.03.2008 passed by respondent No.1 is set aside. However, the petitioner is given liberty to file additional grounds, if any, in the appeal, within a period of four (4) weeks from today. Respondent No.1 shall dispose of the appeal on merits, within a period of eight (8) weeks after receipt of the additional grounds, if any, from the petitioner. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.10929 of 2009 filed by the petitioner is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 22nd APRIL, 2009. kvni