LPA No. 1376 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 1376 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:- 15.10.2010 Union of India through the Military of Defence (D/Pension- A), New Delhi and others. ......Appellants Vs Ragvir Singh Lalotra ......Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: - Ms. Geeta Singhwal, Advocate, for the appellants. * * * * RANJAN GOGOI, J (ORAL) Heard. The sequence of events leading to the filing of this appeal, to say the least, has left us perturbed. The same also reflects a highly inconsistent stand on the part of the appellants. The order challenged in this appeal is a consent order leading to the grant of disability pension to the respondent/writ petitioner. Learned Counsel for the appellants has submitted that the stand of the Union of India before the learned Single Judge was only to the effect that the disability was attributable to military service and not with regard to the extent of disability which should be a minimum of 20% for grant of disability pension. A further submission has been LPA No. 1376 of 2010 (O&M) 2 made by the learned Counsel for the appellants that at the stage when the writ petition was disposed of, the findings of the Medical Board were not with the Counsel representing the Union of India and the same could not be placed before the learned Single Judge. There is nothing on record to suggest that the said point i.e. percentage of disability was brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge and any prayer was made for grant of time for production of report of the Medical Board. The report of the Medical Board which is now available has also not been enclosed to the memo of appeal. Rather, the same has been laid before the Court in the course of the hearing today. We have perused the said report which would indicate that the extent of disability of the respondent/writ petitioner is 11%-14%. If the said finding of the Medical Board is to be accepted the order of the learned Single Judge would appear to be based on factually incorrect premises. Therefore, to avoid any miscarriage of justice, we are left with no option but to give liberty to the appellants to move the learned Single Judge by way of a review-petition, if so advised. However, as the order of the learned Single Judge had come to be passed on account of lack of proper assistance to the Court on behalf of the Union of India and its conduct in prosecuting the present case we deem it proper to impose cost of Rs. 10,000/- on the appellants. The cost amount will be deposited in the account of the Legal Services Authority, Union Territory, Chandigarh. Letters Patent Appeal stands disposed of in terms of the LPA No. 1376 of 2010 (O&M) 3 above. C.M. No. 4162 of 2010 As by order passed today we have not entertained the appeal, no order will be called for on the condonation application. C.M. No. 4163 of 2010 As by order passed today we have not entertained the appeal, no order will be called for on the stay application. (RANJAN GOGOI) JUDGE (RAJAN GUPTA) 15.10.2010 JUDGE Amodh