High CourtsDivision Bench(2005) 06 MAD CK 0041

R. Paramasivam vs Union of India (UOI)

Madras High Court · Decided on 27 June 2005 · Citation: (2005) 4 LW 592

HON’BLE JUDGES
Markandey Katju, C.J · F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Appeal No. 3143 of 2004

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 339 words

Markandey Katju, C.J.—This writ appeal has been filed against the impugned order of the learned single Judge dated 29.03.2004 passed in

Writ Petition No. 19449 of 1999.

2.

The petitioner/appellant had sought disability pension. He was found physically incapacitated by the Medical Board of Doctors and he was

discharged from Army service on 19.08.1993. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents it is stated that the Medical Board has

viewed his disability as neither attributable to nor aggravated by Military Service and opined that it was a constitutional disorder and was not

connected with his service. Also, the Medical Board assessed the degree of disability at less than 20%, which is the minimum required for getting

disability pension.

3.

This Court cannot sit as a Court of appeal over administrative decisions. The scope of judicial review of administrative decisions is very limited.

It is that true while prior to 1947 the Courts would not undertake judicial review of administrative decisions, but after the historical decision of the

House of Lords in the Wednesbury Case (Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury Corporation (1947) 2 All.E.R. 680 the law

was slightly changed and it was held that there can be judicial review of administrative decisions but that can only be done only on certain very

limited grounds, vide State of N.C.T. of Delhi and Another Vs. Sanjeev @ Bittoo, . The Court cannot ordinarily sit in appeal over the decision of

the administrator, but can only look into the manner of reaching the said decision. In the present case, we cannot question the decision of the

Medical Board and we cannot sit in appeal over the same.

4.

Our view gets support from the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India (UOI) and Another Vs. Baljit Singh, and the decision of the

Punjab and Haryana High Court in Gurdip Singh (retd) Subedar (Hony Lt) v. Union of India 1997 (5) SLR 341.

5.

In view of the above, this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.