Ex Rect Ram Dev Singh (Army) vs UOI & Others on 28 January 2026

O R D E R

28.01.2026

MA No 872/2028

1. The Applicant has filed this MA praying for condonation of delay of more than 18 years in filing the OA, which will be considered alongwith the OA.

OA No 766/2018

2. None appeared on behalf of the Applicant.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing on previous occasions on 10/9/2024 and on 16/7/2025, none appeared on behalf of the Applicant. Today also, none appeared on behalf of the Applicant. Consistent non appearance of the counsel for the applicant/applicant himself in this matter on previous occasions as also today explicitly shows that neither the applicant nor his designated counsel is serious about pursuing this Application.

4. Nonetheless, the matter at hand has been examined. Perusal of record reveals that the applicant has filed this OA praying for grant of disability pension to the applicant alongwith rounding off benefits to 50% wef the date of his discharge, ie, 17/7/1999 for life. Vide Reply Statement, the Respondents have stated that the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 09/4/1999 and was invalided out from service wef 14/8/1999 due to the disability, “Cubitus valgus”. He had rendered only 128 days service in the Army.The invaliding medical board assessed the disability of the applicant @NIL Permanent and considered it as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service as also not connected with service. It has also been noted in the medical board proceedings that the origin of disability occurred before joining the Army, which establishes that it was a pre- existing disease, which might have escaped attention at the time of recruitment process. The disability, “Cubitus valgus” is a deformity in which the forearm is angled out away from the body when the arm is fully extended.

5. In view of the foregoing and since the applicant had rendered a mere 128 days service in the Army and was invalided out from service during the basic military training itself due to a pre existing physical deformity, which would have severely restricted the soldier’s capacity to withstand the rigours of army service, we do not find any merit in the plea of the applicant for grant of disability pension. Also, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the action taken by the Respondents in invaliding the applicant from service at his formative basic military training itself owing to a pre-existing physical deformity, warranting our interference.

6. We also find that the Application stands barred by inordinate delay and laches of more than 18 years with no cogent reason for the inexplicable delay and it does not deserve to be entertained on this count too. For this reason, the Application is totally misconceived and is barred by the doctrine of laches and inordinate delay, in the light of the principles laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of C. Jacob Vs. Director of Geology and Mining &Anr., reported in (2008) 10 SCC 115, wherein it was held that a stale claim cannot be revived. The case is also squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of UOI Vs Rajwanti, in Civil Appeal No 583-584 of 2017, decided on 16/1/2017.

7. In-fine, we find that the Application lacks strength on all counts and, hence, is dismissed.

8. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed off.

(SANJIV MITTAL)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

cda/-