V.M. Johnny vs Union Of India And Others

M.A. No. 868 of 2018:

Heard learned counsel for the parties on the point of delay. Delay of 90 days in filing the OA has been explained by the applicant. Keeping in view

the averments made in the MA and finding the same to be bonafide and in the light of the decision in Union of India and others Vs. Tarsem Singh

[2008 (8) SCC 648], we allow the instant MA and condone the delay in filing the OA.

M.A. No. 868 of 2018 stands disposed of accordingly.

O.A. No. 963 of 2018:

By virtue of present OA, applicant is seeking following reliefs :

(A) That the classification in the year 2000 of Sena Medal awarded to 2nd Lt VM Johnny on 26th January, 1974 was erroneously classified (without

jurisdiction) as ""Distinguished"" by Integrated HQ of MOD (Army HQ), MS Branch as intimated vide letter dated 25.02.2013. That they did not have

the authority or jurisdiction to classify the medal, besides the entire procedure was tardy. Even the process of natural justice of prior information to the

individual and taking his views before the classification board was not followed. Therefore the classification of Sena Medal ""Distinguished"" to

Applicant should be quashed and is required to be set aside.

(B) That the classification of the Sena Medal awarded to 2' Lt VM Johnny on 26 Jan 1974 should be placed in the Gallantry category on the face of

record and based on the Citation on the merits of the case.

(C) That the precedent set by Integrated HQ of MOD (Naval) that all such Naval awardees awarded the Nao Sena medals prior to 1995 have been

given allowances. (Thereby indicated that all such medals were deemed to have been classified as Medal in the ""Gallantry"" category). This should also

be followed for pre-1995 Army awardees of Sena Medal (including that of Applicant).

(D) The Court may be pleased to direct that adequate exemplary compensatory costs may be awarded tu the applicant from the respondents for

wrongly and negligently causing monetary loss of 18 years of allowances and considerable anguish to the appellant and his family.

(E) The Court may also be pleased to direct that all the dues due to the appellant No. 2 along with interest should be paid within a period of 3 months

from the date of the order.

(F) Any other directions the Court may give in the interest of justice and equity.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the present case is squarely covered by the order dated 01.08.2019 passed in O.A. No. 472 of

2017 in Brig Porandla Suresh Kumar Patel Vs. Union of India & Ors., wherein the matter was remitted back to the respondents to re-consider the

case for classification of the applicant's pre-1994 Sena Medal under the revised policy. It is stated that similar order can be passed in the instant case

as well.

Mr. Harish Kumar Dhawan, Special Power of Attorney holder of the applicant submits that he has gone through the said order and he has no

objection if similar order is passed in this case.

Under the circumstances, following the aforesaid judgment in Brig Porandla Suresh Kumar Patel's case (supra), present OA is also remitted back

to the respondents to reconsider the case of classification of applicant's pre -1995 Sena Medal under the revised policy. We hope and trust that the

respondents would accord a fair consideration to the case of applicant and intimate their decision to him. Respondents are also directed to issue a

speaking order to the applicant within a period eight weeks from today, in the event of not granting the relief as prayed for in this OA.

With the aforesaid terms, OA stands disposed of with no order as to costs.