- (1.)The challenge in the present writ petition is to an order passed by Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh Regional Bench at Chandimandir (for short 'the Tribunal') on 31.07.2012 whereby the claim of the petitioner for grant of disability pension for the injuries suffered by him while on casual leave remained unsuccessful.
(2.)The petitioner was on casual leave on 21.08.1993 and was riding a scooter when an Army Truck coming from the backside of the petitioner struck him and caused accident in the Cantonment Area in Chandimandir. The petitioner received multiple injuries (recurrent dislocation right shoulder) leading to permanent disablement assessed by the medical board as 20% for a period of two years. It was also opined that the injury is not attributable or aggravated by the service. The claim of the petitioner for disability pension was rejected by Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pension) [for short 'PCDA'] on 02.09.1994. The representation of the petitioner claiming disability pension remained unsuccessful. Thereafter, the Petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The Tribunal relied upon judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1988 of 2011 titled as 'Jagtar Singh Vs. Union of India and others', decided on 13.03.2012 and Civil Appeal No.3686 of 2012 titled as 'Union of India Vs. Talwinder Singh', decided on 20.04.2012 finding that the judgment in Madan Singh Shekhawat Vs. Union of India, 1999 AIR(SC) 3378is entirely different and consequently declined the claim of the petitioner for disability pension.
(3.)Learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court has vehemently argued that Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982 issued on 22.11.1983 as amended on 21.08.1984 explains the duty period and also the injuries suffered on duty period. Relevant clause reads as under:-
"12. A person subject to the disciplinary code of the Armed Forces is on "duty"-

(a) When performing an official task or a task, failure to do which would constitute an offence, triable under the disciplinary code applicable to him.

(b) xx xx xx

(f) An accident which occurs when a man is not strictly 'on duty' as defined may also be attributable to service, provided that it involved risk which was definitely enhanced in kind or degree by the nature, conditions, obligations or incidents of his service and that the same was not a risk common to human existence in modern conditions in India. Thus for instance, where a person is killed or injured by another party by reason of belonging to the Armed Forces, he shall be deemed 'on duty' at the relevant time. This benefit will be given more liberally to the claimant in cases occurring on active service as defined in the Army/Navy/Air Force Act. Injuries

13. In respect of accident or injuries, the following rules shall be observed:-

(a) Injuries sustained when the man is "on duty" as defined, shall be deemed to have resulted from military service, but is cases of injuries due to serious negligence/ misconduct the question of reducing the disability pension will be considered.

(b) In case of self-inflicted injuries whilst on duty, attributability shall not be conceded unless it is established that service factors were responsible for such action, in cases where attributability is conceded, the question of grant of disability pension at full or at reduced rate will be considered."