LPA No. 1561 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 1561 of 2010 Date of Decision 17.11.2010 Union of India and others -----Appellants Versus Suraj Bhan ---Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Dr. Amarpreet Sandhu, 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 field under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 30.04.2009 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the opinion of the medical board describing the disease of the petitioner-respondent as unspecified psychosis could not have been brushed aside by the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions), Allahabad (for short 'the PCDA') on the basis of physical examination of the writ petitioner-respondent. The learned Single Judge has found that the medical board has specified the percentage of disability at 40% for life and authorities recommended for grant of disability pension to the writ petitioner-respondent. LPA No. 1561 of 2010 -2- 2. It has further been noticed that the writ petitioner- respondent served for 9 years which included Anti Insurgency duties. In support of his view, the learned Single Judge has placed reliance on various judgments of this Court rendered in the cases of Ex. Sepoy Bhola Ram v. Union of India and others (2008) 2 SCT 380; Ex. Sepoy Thakur Singh v. Union of India (CWP No. 7927 of 2007) decided 05.05.2008 and Ramesh Kumar Sharma v. Union of India and others (2004) 2 RSJ 116. 3. It has also been held by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) v. S. Balachandran Nair (2005) 13 S.C.C. 128 that the opinion expressed by the Medical Board cannot be brushed aside either by the Court or by the PCDA. The rational is that the Medical Board is an expert body and the opinion expressed by them cannot be tinkered with unless the same is superseded by a re-convened Medical Board. 4. In view of the above, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE November 17, 2010 Atul