Union Of India & Anr. vs Ex. Naik Tek Chand
1998 Latest Caselaw 503 Del

ORDER

1. Heard on the question of admission.

2. The respondent had joined the Indian Army in the branch of Army Signal Corps as a permanent combatant member in the rank of Signal's Man on 29th July, 1963. He was medically examined and found fit. On 4th December, 1997 he was boarded out medically being in law medical category, disability having been assessed at 70%. The respondent applied for disability pension which was denied on the ground that the disability was not attributable to service.

3. The learned Single Judge has held the respondent entitled to such disability pension. The learned Single Judge has opined that on an interpretation of Regulation 173 and Rule 7(b) governing the respondent and as interpreted by the High Court of Delhi in the case of Ex. Gdr. Subash Chander Vs. Union of India 1995 (1) AD (Delhi) 1305, the factum of the disability having not been mentioned in the records at the time of entering into service, was a proof of the respondent having suffered the disease whilst in service and attributable to service. The learned Single Judge has also held that the disease suffered by the respondent could not be said to be constitutional.

4. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the Union of India has come up in appeal. The appeal is barred by time by 105 days. An application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condensation of delay in filing the appeal has been filed.

5. Having perused the contents of the application and the affidavit filed in support thereof, we are not satisfied that a case for condoning the delay in filing the appeal is made out. Even otherwise we are of the opinion that no fault can be found with the view taken by the learned Single Judge and the appeal does not raise any such question either of law or of facts as to call for an interference in appeal.

6. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay in filing the same as also being devoid of any merit.

7. LPA and CMs 419-420/98 are dismissed.