UNION OF INDIA SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI & ORS. vs EX WO HIRA LAL PRASAD

Judgment text excerpt

$~73 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5150/2025, CM APPL. 23452/2025 & CM APPL. 23453/2025 UNION OF INDIA SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Aditya, Adv. for Mr. Padmesh Mishra, CGSC. versus EX WO HIRA LAL PRASAD .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 23.04.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. This writ petition challenges order dated 23 November 2023 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal1 in OA 2105/2022, whereby the claim of the respondent for disability pension has been allowed by the AFT. 2. We note that this writ petition has been filed nearly one and a half years after the order passed by the AFT on 23 November 2023. There is not a whisper of an averment in the petition explaining the delay. In our view, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed even on 1 “the AFT”, hereinafter W.P.(C) 5150/2025 Signature Not Verified Page 1 of 9 Signed By:SHILPI Signing Date:26.04.2025 15:17:20 the ground of delay and laches. 3. Nonetheless, as the issue in controversy is no longer res integra, we proceed to examine the matter on merits. 4. We have heard Mr. Aditya, learned Counsel who appears for Mr. Padmesh Mishra, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the petitioner. 5. The respondent was released on medical grounds, as he was suffering from primary hypertension and retinal vasculitis in both eyes. 6. We have seen the record of the Release Medical Board2. From the record, the following facts emerged: (i) The respondent had served in the Indian Air Force3 for 35 years and 4 months before he was released on low medical category. (ii) In the personal statement of the respondent, before the RMB, he has specifically stated that,