2009(8) SCR 934

SECRETARY, M/O DEFENCE & ORS. v.

AJIT SINGH (Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2003)

MAY 6, 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ.]

The Judgment of the Court was delivered  

DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is to the  Judgment of the Learned Single Judge of the Punjab & Haryana  

High Court.  The appellants had filed an appeal  before the High  

Court  challenging the judgment dated 27-07-1999 of  the District  

Judge,  Bhiwani  by which the appeal  filed by the Union of  India  

against the Judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional  

Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Charkhi Dadri was dismissed.  

2. Respondent who was enrolled in the Military service on 29-

09-1985 had filed  a  suit  for  declaration  to  the effect  that  he is  

entitled  to  disability  pension  with  effect  from  31-03-1990.  

According  to  him,  during  the  course  of  his  service,  he  has  

sustained 20% disability on account of electric shock suffered by  

him while  he was  on casual  leave.  On account  of  this  he was  

declared medically unfit and ultimately discharged on 31-03-1990.  

According to the present respondent he was entitled to disability  

pension.  

3.  Stand of  the present  appellants  was that  he suffered  an  

electric shock while he was on casual  leave and working in his  

house near the tube well. It was pointed out that in any event he

had not completed 10 years of service and had been discharged  

after four years eleven months and two days of service. Therefore,  

there is no question of granting any disability pension. The Trial  

Court held that the respondent was entitled to disability pension.  

Same  view  was  maintained  in  appeal  by  the  District  Judge,  

Bhiwani and the High Court.  

4. Placing reliance on the decisions of this Court in  Union of  

India & Others Vs. Keshar Singh [2007 (12) SCC 675] and Union  

of India & Others Vs. Surinder Singh Rathore [2008 (5) SCC 747, it  

is  submitted  by  learned  Counsel  for  the  appellants  that  the  

disability is not attributable to or aggravate by military service. In  

addition he had not completed the period of requisite service and  

therefore not entitled to disability pension. Learned Counsel for the  

respondent submitted that the High Court's view does not suffer  

from any infirmity.

5. Keeping in view what this court has stated in the case of  

Keshar  Singh  and  Surinder  Singh  (supra),  the  judgment  of  the  

High Court is clearly unsustainable and in the circumstances, we  

set aside the impugned Judgment of the High Court.

6.  However,  on  the  facts  and  circumstances  of  the  case  

payment, if any, already been made to the respondent by way of  

disability pension shall not be recovered.

7. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.