SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH, JJ.
Rajumon T.M. – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 998 of 2025 (@ Diary No. 20836 of 2022)
Decided On : 07-05-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. circumstances of medical invalidation and appellant's condition upon enlistment. (Para 3 , 6 , 10) |
| 2. respondents' contest against the appellant's claim for disability pension. (Para 4 , 5 , 8) |
| 3. requirement of providing reasoning in medical board's opinion regarding disability. (Para 9 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. court's decision to grant disability pension due to lack of substantiated reasoning. (Para 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT :
(Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, J.)
The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and final order dated 17.01.2013 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi in OA No.100 of 2011 by which the claim of the appellant for grant of disabilities pension was denied to the appellant.
2. Only the relevant facts in brief for the purpose of deciding this appeal may be adverted to.
3. The appellant, Rajumon T.M. No.13978552W was enrolled in the Indian Army on 17.11.1988 as a sepoy and after serving more than 9 (nine) years he was discharged from service on being diagnosed with Schizophrenia. His discharge on medical invalidation was based on the opinion of the Invalidating Medical Board held on 30 March, 1998 at the Command Hospital, Western Command, Chandimandir which found that the onset of the invalidating disease was in August 1993 during which period the appellant had served in a peace station and that the disability was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service and the said disease of the appellant was constitutional in nature and not connected with the service. The disability was assessed at 30 percent for two years. Accordingly, the appellant’s claim for disability pension was rejected by the CCDA (Pension), Allahabad vide letter dated 04.01.1999 which was communicated to the appellant by the AMC Records vide letter dated 15.01.1999.
4. The said rejection was challenged before the first appellate committee which was dismissed. The appellant, thereafter, made an unsuccessful attempt for redressal of his grievances through a Member of the Parliament. The appellant was informed by the Ministry of Defence vide communication dated 07.11.2009 that the matter had already been considered and his appeal against rejection of disability pension claim was turned down earlier by the competent authority. He was also informed that he had not preferred the second appeal after his first appeal was dismissed.
5. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his claim for disability pension, the appellant unsuccessfully approached the Armed Forces Tribunal, Original Bench at Kochi in OA No.100 of 2011 which was heard with other applicants seeking similar reliefs.
6. Before the Armed Forces Tribunal it was pleaded by the appellant that he had been found medically fit at the time of enrolment and nothing adverse was noted at that point of time and the appellant became afflicted with the said disease during his service which had nothing to do with the family conditions and since the said disease developed in course of his service, he was entitled to the disability pension.
7. The respondents contested the claim of the appellant before the Armed Forces Tribunal by contending that the appellant had been posted at peace station at the time of onset of the disease and being deployed in peace stations, and it could not have contributed to the said illness nor can the service said to have aggravated the disease, which was confirmed by the Medical Board on examination of the appellant as mentioned above. Further, it was contended that nothing was brought on record to contradict the finding of the Medical Board and as such the claim of the appellant could not be entertained.
8. In support of the claim of the respondents, a number of decisions of this Court were relied upon namely; Union of India & Ors. vs. Keshar Singh, (2007) 12 SCC 675; Union of India & Ors. vs. Surinder Singh Rathore, (2008) 5 SCC 747; Secretary, Ministry of Defence and Ors. vs. A.V.Damodaran (Dead) through LRs. and others, (2009) 9 SCC 140; U
Union of India & Ors. vs. Keshar Singh
Union of India & Ors. vs. Surinder Singh Rathore
Secretary, Ministry of Defence and Ors. vs. A.V.Damodaran (Dead) through LRs. and others
Union of India & Ors. vs. Jujhar Singh
Union of India and Anr. vs. Talwinder Singh
No. 14666828M EX CFN Narsingh Yadav vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) 9 SCC 667 [Para 8]
Kerala High Court in Baby vs. Union of India
Veer Pal Singh v. Ministry of Defence
Maniben Maganbhai Bhariya v. Distt. Development Officer, Dahod
AI
Disability pension claims require medical opinions to be substantiated with detailed reasoning. The absence of justification in medical assessments can invalidate decisions denying pension benefits, ....
The absence of adequate reasoning by the Medical Board regarding disability attribution to military service invalidates denial of pension rights.
The disability pension is contingent upon demonstrable evidence that a disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service, with the medical board's findings being central to determining ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.