Delhi High Court
Ex. Nk. Narikar, No. 2946458 vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. ... on 31 August, 2006
Author: S Kumar
Bench: S Kumar, G Sistani
JUDGMENT
Swatanter Kumar, J.
1. The petitioner, Ex.Naik Narikar, was enrolled in the Army as a combatant soldier on 16.7.1957 and was invalided from service in low medical category w.e.f 25.1.1974 and was sanctioned 20% disability pension. His prayer is that he is entitled to higher rate of pension of disability on account of disability element as he had retired prior to 1.1.96. He served a legal notice upon the respondents which was replied to by the respondents vide letter dated 28.6.2005 stating as under:
1. Refer to your petition No. SM/23/LN/2005 dated 19 Jun 2005 served through your advocate.
2. It is intimated that, as per policy in vogue, the benefits of rounding off of disability element is applicable to those persons who were discharged from military service before completion of service tenure on medical grounds in low medical category on or after 01 Jan 96, whereas you were discharged from service on 25 Jan 1974. Hence, you are not entitled the benefits of rounding off of disability element.
2. The petitioner is challenging this order and prays that he is entitled to grant of higher element of disability pension in view of the judgments of this Court and the notification issued by the competent authority.
3. In the case of Lt Col.(Retd.) Ram Narain, there is a similar prayer stating that the petitioner was invalided out of Army service with 30% disability w.e.f 30.09.2002. The respondent in furtherance to the directions issued by the Court in a writ petition filed by the petitioner being Civil Writ No. 9460/2004 in which the Court allowed the writ petition, has paid 30% disability element of pension w.e.f 01.10.2002. The respondent is stated to have issued a notification dated 31.1.01 revising the rates of disability as well as percentage of disability whereby less than 50% was to be treated as 50% disability. The pension of the other Jawans have been revised while the petitioner's percentage of disability has not been revised as per the notification issued by the respondents. The petitioner has placed on record the copy of the notification dated 31.1.01. Under Para 7.2 of the said policy, the percentage to be reckoned for computing disability element has been revised and less than 50% is to be read as 50%. The petitioner has relied upon Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Ex.Sub. Shamsher Singh v. Union of India and Ors. being CW No. 1990/2003 decided on 20.7.04 in support of his claim.
4. Lastly in the case of Ex. Sep. Sita Ram, the petitioner has stated that he was enrolled in Army on 20.3.1986 and was invalided out of Army service on 16.11.1991. The petitioner was receiving 20% disability pension w.e.f 16.11.1991 including the disability element of the pension. Relying upon the notification of the Government of India dated 31.1.01 in regard to revision of percentage of disability, the petitioner prays for grant of enhanced percentage of disability entitling him to receive higher element of disability pension. The petitioners have relied upon various judgments in support of their claim. They have also relied upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Ex.Hav. Surat Singh v. Union of India and Ors. being CW No. 8364/2006 decided on 27.7.06 for grant of relief prayed for.
5. There is no dispute before us that the various judgments of this Court including the judgment of this Court in the case of Ex. Hav. Surat Singh's case (supra), have attained finality and all the petitioners therein have been granted relief.
6. In view of the various judgments including the judgment in the case of Ex. Hav. Surat Singh (supra), we allow these writ petitions and direct the respondents to consider the case of each of the petitioners in accordance with the notification dated 31.1.01 as well as the judgments of this Court and grant the respective petitioners the deemed higher percentage of disability and consequent relief of increase in the element of disability pension payable to the petitioners. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are left to bear their own cost.
