CWP-20353 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (155) Union of India JC 154959 Ex. Sub Bawa Singh CORAM: Present: ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, 1. Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 26.11.2018 (Annexure P Chandigarh (respondent No.2) Hon’ble Supreme Court, in catena of cases, wherein, primacy of medical board opinion has been upheld in disability pen 2. extracted hereinafter: 20353-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Union of India and others Versus JC 154959 Ex. Sub Bawa Singh and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Mr. Rahul Verma, Central Govt. Counsel for Mr. Rakesh Verma, Sr. Panel Counsel for the petitioners-Union of India. **** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (ORAL) The instant writ petition, cast under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 26.11.2018 (Annexure P-1), passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (respondent No.2), being contrary to the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court, in catena of cases, wherein, primacy of medical board opinion has been upheld in disability pen The facts, in brief, as notice extracted hereinafter:- “The applicant entered military service in a fit medical condition on 11.12.1982. During the course of his service, he incurred the disability of Ischemic MCA Territory (Superior Branch) and was finally discharged from service on 28.02.2012. At the time of invalided out, his disability was assessed at 50% by Medical Board for life.” 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-20353-2025 Date of Decision : 28.07.2025 …Petitioners Versus another ...Respondents ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Rahul Verma, Central Govt. Counsel for Mr. Rakesh Verma, Sr. Panel Counsel Union of India. (ORAL) The instant writ petition, cast under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 26.11.2018 1), passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, , being contrary to the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court, in catena of cases, wherein, primacy of medical board opinion has been upheld in disability pension cases. The facts, in brief, as noticed by the learned Tribunal, are The applicant entered military service in a fit medical condition on 11.12.1982. During the course of his service, he incurred the disability of Ischemic Stroke (Rt) MCA Territory (Superior Branch) and was finally discharged from service on 28.02.2012. At the time of invalided out, his disability was assessed at 50% by Medical Board for life.” 1 The instant writ petition, cast under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 26.11.2018 1), passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, , being contrary to the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court, in catena of cases, wherein, primacy of medical are The applicant entered military service in a fit medical condition on 11.12.1982. During the course of his Stroke (Rt) MCA Territory (Superior Branch) and was finally discharged from service on 28.02.2012. At the time of invalided out, his disability was assessed at 50% by MANPREET SINGH 2025.07.31 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-20353 3. 75%, learned Tribunal has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘Dharamvir Singh vs. Union of India’ (2013) 7 SCC 316 otherwise, it is not disputed that respondent No.1, was invalided out, and suffered the disability pension has been allowed judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court titled ‘Union of India vs. Ram Avtar’ decided o 4. senior panel counsel for Union of India, however, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the view taken by the learned Tribunal, in the order (supra) either on facts, or in law. 5. July 28, 2025 Manpreet 20353-2025 For the purpose of grant of disability pension to the ext 75%, learned Tribunal has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme ‘Dharamvir Singh vs. Union of India’ (2013) 7 SCC 316 otherwise, it is not disputed that respondent No.1, was invalided out, and suffered the disability during the service. disability pension has been allowed to the respondent No.1, judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, passed ‘Union of India vs. Ram Avtar’ decided o Though various submissions have been made by the learned senior panel counsel for Union of India, however, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the view taken by the learned Tribunal, in the order (supra) facts, or in law. Consequently, the instant writ petition is ( , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2 For the purpose of grant of disability pension to the extent of 75%, learned Tribunal has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme ‘Dharamvir Singh vs. Union of India’ (2013) 7 SCC 316. Even otherwise, it is not disputed that respondent No.1, was invalided out, and disability during the service. The benefit of rounding off to the respondent No.1, in terms of the , passed in Civil Appeal No.418 of 2012 ‘Union of India vs. Ram Avtar’ decided on 10.12.2014. Though various submissions have been made by the learned senior panel counsel for Union of India, however, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the view taken by the learned Tribunal, in the order (supra) Consequently, the instant writ petition is dismissed. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA JUDGE (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No 2 ent of 75%, learned Tribunal has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Even otherwise, it is not disputed that respondent No.1, was invalided out, and he The benefit of rounding off in terms of the Civil Appeal No.418 of 2012, Though various submissions have been made by the learned senior panel counsel for Union of India, however, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the view taken by the learned Tribunal, in the order (supra), ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) ) MANPREET SINGH 2025.07.31 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment