High CourtsDivision Bench(2006) 05 P&H CK 0057

Roop Singh (Ex-Hav.) vs Union of India (UOI)

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 22 May 2006 · Citation: (2007) 1 SLJ 309

HON’BLE JUDGES
H.S. Bedi, Acting C.J. · Ranjit Singh, J

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

5 paragraphs · 277 words

H.S. Bedi, Actg. C.J.—This order shall dispose of L.P.A. No. 943 of 2002 (Sucha Singh v. Union of India and Ors.) and L.P.A. No. 893 of 2002 (3380528 Ex-Hav. Roop Singh v. Union of India and Ors.). We observe that in this case i.e. L.P.A. No. 893 of 2002, 3380528 Ex-Hav. Roop Singh v. Union of India and Ors. the appellant had put in more than 17 years of service and in L.P.A. No. 943 of 2002, Sucha Singh v. Union of India and Ors. the appellant had put in 21 years of service.

2.

We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length. We find that the appellant''s claim to disability pension has been declined by the respondents on the ground that the disability of the appellant was between 15% to 19% whereas, the minimum disability required for the purpose of disability pension was 20%.

3.

We find it somewhat difficult to believe that disability can be computed with such mathematical precision so as to make it between 15% to 19%, and not between 15% to 20% which would make the appellant entitled to the pension.

4.

We, accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy, dispose of this appeal with a direction to the respondents to get the appellant re-examined by a medical board for a reassessment of his disability and in case it is found to be 20% or more, the disability pension be released to him. We also make it clear that in case the respondents, on re-examination, determine the appellant''s disability at less than 20%, he would be entitled to approach this Court yet again.

Dasti order.