Disability pensions for service-related ailments must be granted unless explicitly proven otherwise by the employer.

JUDGMENT :

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

1. This petition assails order dated 8 April 2024 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, [“the AFT”, hereinafter] in OA 814/2019 whereby the respondent’s application for grant of disability pension on the ground that he suffers from Seizure Disorder with 20% disability rounded off to 50% for life, has been allowed by the AFT.

2. The issue is covered by a recent decision rendered by us in UOI v Ex Sub Gawas Anil Madso, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 2018

3. Nonetheless, we have heard Dr. Vijendra Singh Mahndiyan, learned CGSC for the petitioners, and have perused the record.

4. The respondent was released in Low Medical Category on his being found to be suffering from Seizure Disorder. From the record, including the proceedings of the Release Medical Board, [“RMB”, hereinafter], the following facts emerge:

(i) The respondent had served in the Indian Navy for over 15 years before he was diagnosed as suffering from Seizure Disorder.

(ii) The respondent, in his self-declaration, specifically declared that he had not been suffering from Seizure Disorder prior to joining the Indian Navy. The declaration reads thus:

The correctness of this declaration is not doubted either by the RMB or by the petitioner before the AFT or before this Court.

(iii) The reason regarding the Seizure Disorder suffered by the respondent has not been attributable to military service, as entered by the RMB reads thus:

“Seizure Disorder (ICD-40.4): Onset of disability 05 Apr while posted ashore. No close time association with stress and strain of field / afloat service. Hence, neither attributable nor aggravated in terms of Para 33, Chapter VI of GMO (MP), 2008.

(iv) We have already held, in our judgment in Gawas Anil Madso, that where the applicant was not suffering from the ailment at the time of entry into service, the RMB is required to positively identify the cause for the ailment, to justify a finding that it is not attributable to military service. The Commanding Officer’s certificate specifically states that the respondent was not responsible, owing to any act or omission of his, for the ailment from which he was suffering. The entry in that regard reads as under:

(v) Regarding para 33 of the Chapter VI of the GMO 2008, we have, in our judgment in UOI v EX LCOM (TAC) Anil Kumar, [2025 SCC OnLine Del 2349], observed thus:

“11. Apropos Epilepsy, Para 33 of Chapter VI of the GMO 2008, vivisected into its individual components, specifies that:

(i) Epilepsy can develop at any age, often in adolescents, with or without a family history.

(ii) While some cases are idiopathic, potential causes include brain trauma, infections, metabolic disorders, or high-altitude anoxia.

(iii) Epilepsy is considered attributable to service if caused by infections or service-related trauma.

(iv) Seizures can be triggered by sleep deprivation, stress, exhaustion, infections, fever, and loud noise.

(v) Epilepsy may develop up to seven years after exposure to trauma, infection, or tuberculosis, which latency period should be considered before rejecting epilepsy cases.

(vi) Epilepsy aggravation is considered if seizures occur during active service in high-risk environments, and (vii) high-risk duties include battles, frontline operations, military training, high-altitude missions, and submarine or