IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.M. Nos.1406 to 1408-LPA of 2009 L.P.A. No.525 of 2009 Date of decision: 2.7.2009 Union of India & others. -----Appellants Vs. No.1417529 Ex-Recruit Jagjit Singh. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Advocate for the appellants. ----- ORDER: 1. This appeal has been preferred against judgment of the learned Single Judge, allowing the writ petition of the respondent by giving following directions:- “In view of above, both the writ petitions are allowed. A direction is issued to the respondents to assess the disability pension of the petitioner in each case by keeping in view that they had suffered 20% disability for life, which is referable to service, with effect from the dates their disability pension has been discontinued. It shall include both disability element and service element of pension. However, the arrears are confined to 38 months preceding the date of filing of petitions which are 24.01.2002 (C.W.P. No.1687 of LPA No.525 of 2009 2002) and 29.01.2002 (C.W.P. No.1906 of 2002). The arrears shall be paid within a period of two months from today. The petitioners in both cases shall continue to get disability pension for life.” 2. The respondent was enrolled with the Indian Army on 11.10.1951. He was posted in an area which was infested with ‘PULMONARY TUBERCULOSIS’ in the year 1953. On account of this, he himself suffered the said disease, which at that time was considered to be deadly disease. On the recommendation of the Medical Board, he was boarded out of service on 1.5.1953. He was granted disability pension consisting of service element as well as disability element for 100% disability. However, later, pension was reduced on account of reduction of disability and on 23.2.1962, it was found that disability at 20% was static. Inspite of this opinion, the Chief Controller Defence Accounts (CCDA) reduced the pension to less than 20% and thereafter, stopped the disability pension altogether w.e.f. 24.2.1962. After approaching the concerned authorities and finding no redressal, the respondent preferred a writ petition in this Court. The appellants opposed the prayer by submitting that no interference was called for with the view taken by the CCDA. 3. Learned Single Judge held that in view of opinion of the Medical Board, CCDA had no jurisdiction to decline pension. Reliance was placed on judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court 2 LPA No.525 of 2009 in Ex-Sapper Mohinder Singh v. Union of India Civil Appeal No.164 of 1993 decided on 14.1.1993. 4. Even though there is a delay of about three years in filing this appeal, we have heard learned counsel for the appellants on merits. Only point pressed is that the disease is now curable and if cured, the respondent should not be held entitled to pension. 5. We do not find any merit in this submission in view of opinion of the Medical Board, as quoted in the judgment of the learned Single Judge that disability of 20% will remain static. There is nothing to show that the disease has been cured. 6. Since even on merits, we do not find any ground to interfere, no order need be passed on application for condonation of delay. 7. The appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE July 02, 2009 ( DAYA CHAUDHARY ) ashwani JUDGE 3