IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.5625   OF 2008      [Arising out of SLP(C)No.11656  of 2006 ]

RAVINDRAN P.M.                                       Appellant(s)

                     VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                Respondent(s)   

          O R D E R   

Leave granted.

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 27th  

July,  2005  passed  by  the  High  Court  of  Kerala  in  O.P.No.  13522(1)  of  1997  

dismissing the appellant's claim that he was entitled to disability pension, having  

suffered injuries in an accident while in possession of an 'out pass'.

On behalf  of  the appellant,  who was enrolled in  the Army in  

1980, it was  submitted that since he had been involved in an accident while he was  

holding such 'out pass', it must be held that he was on duty at the relevant point of  

time.  The High Court had negated the said stand and, accordingly, the appellant  

has filed the instant appeal.

-2-

Having  heard  learned  counsel  for  the  parties  and  having

considered the answer from the Army authorities, addressed to the appellant on 2nd  

April, 2008, in reply to the application filed by him on 30th October, 2007 under the  

Right to Information Act, 2005 defining  'out pass' to be a permission accorded to  

an individual to proceed outside the unit precints as   per the customs of service  

and further clarifying that during the said period the person concerned is deemed  

to be on duty and continues to remain subject to the Army Act, we are inclined to  

accept the case  made out by the appellant.   It must also be indicated that the  

learned  Additional  Solicitor  General  was  not  in  a  position  to  dispute  the  said  

contention in view of the said communication from the Army authorities.

Accordingly,  we allow  the  appeal,  and  upon  holding  that  the  

appellant continued to be on duty while in possession of an 'out pass', we further  

hold that he would be entitled to disability pension as claimed by him.   

The judgment of the High Court  is, accordingly, set aside.   

It appears from the records that the appellant  

    -3-

suffered the accident in 1986 and he claims interest on such pension as has been  

granted in the case of Lance  Dafadar  Joginder  Singh  Vs.   Union of  India  and  

others [1995(supp.)3  SCC  332],   but  such  prayer  is  opposed  on  behalf  of  the  

respondents on the ground that the appellant had received an offer of alternative  

appointment, which he had refused.  

In  such  circumstances,  having  considered  both  the  views,  we  allow

interest on the disability pension payable to the appellant from the date of filing of  

the first writ petition at the rate of eight per cent per annum.

There will be no order as to costs.

           ....................J.             (ALTAMAS KABIR)

           ....................J.             (MARKANDEY KATJU)

NEW DELHI; September 11,   2008.