• Army Act, 1956 (46 of 1956) - "Chronic Suppurative Otitis" with large central perforation of tympanic membrane - As per history as reproduced in the proceedings of the Medical Board, the problem in childhood was in the left ear - Now the problem is in the right ear - The general examination shows that the left ear drum is scared intact no discharge, whereas there is mucous discharge - Drum head shows subtotal perforation in the right ear which was not noticed at the time of entry into Army - Thus, the disease is attributable to or aggravated by military service - Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards 1982. (176) P.L.R.
  •         Army Act, 1956 (46 of 1956) - Mitral Valve Proplase (MVP) is generally sporadic, but it is also associated with a variety of congenital disorders of connective tissue including Marfan Syndrome - Marfan Syndrome is connected with mutations on chromosome - The Tribunal concluded that it is a congenital disorders and any connection with physiologic stress is over a long period of time and its manifestation is late in life - Therefore, the disability of the petitioner is not attributable to or aggravated by military service - There is no finding that `Marfans Syndrome Mitral Valve Proplase' could not be detected at the time of entry of the petitioner in military service - Disability was assessed for a period of two years - There is no further report that the disability of the petitioner is continuing and the extent of disability - Petitioner to subject himself for an examination by the Medical Board, who will assess the current extent of disability. (176) P.L.R.
  •         Army Act, 1956 (46 of 1956) - Schizophrenia or for that matter acute form of Schizophrenia i.e. `Catatonic Schizophrenia' could not be detected by the Medical Board at the time of acceptance of the petitioner in the Indian Army being a mental status - The mental condition cannot be detected at the time of enrollment - The medical examination is more of physical fitness - Therefore, `Schizophrenic' behavior could not be detected at the time of entry of the petitioner into the service - The period between which he has been enrolled and was found to be suffering is around 9 months - He has been boarded out three months' later - Therefore, the disease i.e. `Catatonic Schizophrenia' cannot be said to be either attributable to or aggravated by military service - Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982. (176) P.L.R.
  •         Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1956) S.  69 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (of 2012) S. 10, 12 - Word `course of duty' or `otherwise' make it wide enough to include the time other than the duty hours also - The offence of sexual assault committed by a member of Armed Forces or Security Forces on a child thus amounts to aggravated sexual  assault - Provision does not make out any distinction that only such sexual assault shall be considered aggravated sexual assault when it is committed in operational area - The analogy as depicted above makes out the misconduct of the petitioner to be covered under the terminology of `Aggravated Sexual Assault' in terms of Section 9 of the Act. (178) P.L.R.
  •         Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1956) S. 164(2), Section 113, 115, 129 - The composition of summary General Court Martial is altogether distinct and different from that of General Court Martial under the Act read with Army Rules, 1954 framed thereunder - A pointed reference is made to Sections 113, 115 & 129 of the Act read with Rules 40, 102, & 164 of the 1954 Rules to urge that in view of Rule 164 only Rule 102 is applicable and not Rule 40 of the 1954 Rules - Army Rules, 1954. (177) P.L.R.
  •         Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1956) S. 179 Note 5(a) - However the above is only a note under Section 179 of the Army Act, 1950 which relates to pardon and remission - The said note, even otherwise relates to the period spent under dismissal - The same in any case would not over ride the provisions of the Army Act 1950, the Army Rules 1954 or the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 -  The claim of the petitioner if permissible under the relevant statutory rules and regulations cannot be defeated by reference to a note - The question, in fact that requires to be considered for the grant of pensionary benefits is the date from which the order of discharge becomes effective. (173) P.L.R. 7