Union of India and The Officer-in-charge, Records, Bureau of Sailors vs Sanjay Kumar

Deepak Gupta, J.—This appeal by the Union of India is directed against the judgement of the learned Single Judge dated 2.3.2007 whereby he held that the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the original writ petitioner) is entitled to disability pension. It is not disputed that the writ petitioner was serving in the Indian Navy. It is also not disputed that he was invalided out of service on the ground that he was suffering from Schizophrenia. It is also not disputed that he was not suffering from this disease when he joined the Indian Navy and he was afflicted with this disease during his service. The only dispute is whether this disease is attributable to or aggravated by the service rendered by the writ petitioner in the Indian Navy. The petitioner had made a specific averment in this behalf. The respondents despite being given various opportunities did not file reply. Even the proceedings of the Medical Board were not placed on record and it is in these circumstances that the learned Single Judge held as follows:-

Coupled with the fact that for five long years the respondents have not filed the reply nor placed on record any material to show that the disease neither was attributable to nor aggravated by military service, allegations made by the petitioner have to be accepted.

Shri Sandeep Sharma, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, has contended with great force that he may be permitted to place the medical record on file. There is virtually no explanation why for five years such documents were not placed on the record of the learned Single Judge. At this stage same cannot be allowed. Faced with this situation, Shri Sandeep Sharma, states that even annexure P-3 placed on record by the petitioner indicates that there was some medical opinion that the disease was not aggravated by or attributable to military service. This is a letter addressed to the writ petitioner by one Shri Daulat Ram, Section Officer, conveying to him the factum of rejection of his appeal for grant of disability pension on the ground that the medical board had not found that the disability was attributable to or aggravated by the duties of military service. This is not the primary document. The primary document was the opinion of the medical board itself. Once the Union of India failed to place that on record the learned Single Judge was justified in drawing an adverse inference against the Union of India. Hence, we find no merit in the appeal which is accordingly rejected. No costs.