IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13716 of 1993 Date of Decision: April 15, 2009 Jagrup Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS Union of India .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Rajesh Sehgal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Sharma, Central Government Standing Counsel, for the respondent. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This civil writ petition prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant disability pension to the petitioner @ 30% from the date of release of the petitioner. It has been brought out that the petitioner was enrolled in the Army on 20.9.1977. At the time of induction in the Army, the petitioner was found medically fit. In 1987 while conducting parade, the petitioner became unconscious and was diagnosed as suffering from “depressive neurosis”. CWP No.13716 of 1993 [2] The petitioner was given treatment in military hospital. Finally, Invaliding Medical Board was convened on 16.3.1989 which recommended that the petitioner be released from service immediately. Disability was assessed at 30% as is evident from Annexure P-1. Annexure P-1, Para 2(c) (running page 14 of the paperbook) indicates that reason given by the Medical Board was “due to unusual stress and strain of military service”. The petitioner was released from service on 30.6.1989, however, some documents were got signed from the petitioner, the effect of which is that the petitioner was released on his own request. The petitioner applied for disability pension which, however, was declined vide Annexure P-2 on the ground that the petitioner was discharged from service before fulfilling the conditions of enrolment, on his own request. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on judgment dated 18.2.2009 rendered by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.19417 of 2007 titled ‘Ex. Naik Parmod Kumar vs. Union of India & Others’ wherein reliance has been placed on Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in Civil Writ Petition No.10174 of 2006 decided on 1.4.2008 (Naik Amrik Singh vs. Union of India & Others) and other judgments of the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India. Learned counsel for the respondents CWP No.13716 of 1993 [3] has not been able to dispute that case of the petitioner is covered by the judgment rendered in Ex. Naik Parmod Kumar’s case (supra). I have considered the issue. While Annexure P-1 under which the petitioner was found to be suffering from “depressive neurosis” to the extent of 30% for two years, the claim for disability pension was denied to the petitioner on 28.1.1993. The present petition was filed in 1993 itself. The petitioner has been denied the disability pension vide Annexure P-2 on the ground that he was discharged on his own request before fulfilling the conditions of enrolment. The respondents have not disputed the fact that the disability was caused to the petitioner due to unusual stress and strain of military service. Similar issue has been addressed by this Court in Ex. Naik Parmod Kumar’s case (supra). Since the disability suffered by the petitioner is attributable to military service, the action of the respondents in not giving disability pension is clearly arbitrary. Since the matter is covered by the judgment dated 18.2.2009 rendered in Ex. Naik Parmod Kumar’s case (supra), this petition is allowed. Because the petitioner was adjudged as 30% disable for two years, the petitioner would be CWP No.13716 of 1993 [4] brought before the Re-servey Medical Board for considering his present medical condition. The petitioner, however, would be paid disability pension for the intervening period. (AJAI LAMBA) April 15, 2009 JUDGE avin