LPA No. 85 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No.85 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision 21 .1.2011 Union of India and others ... Appellants Versus Kuldeep Singh ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR . JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN Present: Dr. Amarpreet Sandhu,Advocate for the appellant 1.To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2.Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgement dated 22.4.2009 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the gun shot wound suffered by the writ petitioner- respondent on the right side of chest and lung would qualify for disability pension because the same was received by him while he was on duty. The learned Single Judge has dis-approved the opinion of the Board of Enquiry which has opined in para 5(b) that the injury suffered by the writ petitioner- respondent was accidental and not a battle injury. It has come on record that the petitioner had suffered gun shot wound on the right side of the chest while handling a weapon; and he was down graded to a lower medical category and opted for voluntary discharge. He was discharged on 31.1.2005 in permanently low medical category by assessing the degree of his disability at 20%. The learned Single Judge has held him entitled to disability pension and have issued directions to the appellant to consider his LPA No. 85 of 2011 2 case under Rule 13 of the Entitlement Rules, 1982 promulgated by the Ministry of Defence (as amended till date). Having heard the learned counsel, we are of the view that once the injury has been suffered during the course of service, there cannot be any escape from the conclusion that it was attributable to military service. The disability suffered on account of the injury is the basic reason for lowering his medical category which led to his discharge. Therefore, the grant of disability pension by the learned Single Judge by recording a finding that the injury was attributable to military service does not call for any interference. There is no merit in the appeal. Dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (T.P.S.Mann ) 21.1.2011 Judge okg