IMPORTANT POINT
The classification of an injury as a 'Battle Casualty' allows a military personnel to claim a war injury pension upon repayment of previously received compensation, emphasizing a liberal interpretation of pension regulations to benefit service members.

JUDGMENT :

Harisankar V. Menon, J.

The respondents in OA No.90 of 2019 before the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi (for short, the ‘Tribunal’) are the appellants herein. The applicant before the Tribunal is the respondent herein.

2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of this writ petition are as follows:

The respondent herein was commissioned in the Indian Army on 19.12.1981 and superannuated on 30.11.2013. In the year 1995, the respondent sustained severe injuries due to a mine blast, the degree of disablement being assessed at 40% for life. Respondent was paid a lumpsum compensation of Rs.60,192/- as per Annexure A2 dated 14.02.2001. Later the respondent developed Bronchial Asthma, assessed at 20% by the medical authorities and treated as aggravated by military service. The respondent claimed that the blast injury to both hands was classified as ‘Battle Casualty’ by Annexure A3 dated 02.07.2009, on account of which, the respondent herein expressed his desire to refund the lumpsum compensation received with interest, for earning disability pension. The said request was rejected. At the time the respondent was relieved from service on superannuation, the Release Medical Board assessed the disabilities at 40% for the Mine Blast Injury and 20% for the Bronchial Asthma and the composite disability assessed at 50% for life. However, as the respondent had already availed lumpsum compensation for the disability-Mine Blast injury-and since the disablement as against Bronchial Asthma was assessed at 10% for life, he was not extended the benefits under the Pension Regulations for the Army, 2008.

3. In such circumstances, the respondent filed OA No.52 of 2015 before the Tribunal. By Annexure A6 order dated 28.03.2016, the Tribunal found as under:

“13. As observed earlier, Regulations 90 as well as 102 make it amply clear that once compensation has been paid in lieu of disability element/war injury element, no restoration of the same element shall be permitted. The applicant had accepted one time grant, albeit as disability pension, as was prevalent at the time he was granted the same. It was only after a period of nearly seven years that he wanted to return the same. Since no provisions exist, we do not see any merit in the contention of the applicant.

14. The Release Medical Board at the time of superannuation of the officer assessed him to have two disabilities, mine blast injury attributable to military service assessed at 40% for life and Bronchial Asthma assessed at 20% aggravated by military service for life with the composite disability at 50% for life. Since the applicant had been granted 40% as lump sum payment for the first disability with the residual disability being less than 20%, he was found not eligible to receive any disability pension.

15. As observed from Reg 90 (as also Reg 102), once a compensation has been paid in lieu of disability element (or war injury element), there shall be no further entitlement to the disability element for the same disability. It further amplifies that such disability shall also not qualify for grant of any pensionary benefits or relief subsequently. While Regulations provide for a re-assessment if the degree of disablement increases, it is observed that the applicant’s disablement due to mine blast injury which was assessed at 40% for life in 1995 continued to remain so even at the time of his retirement from service. It is also observed from his Release Medical Board proceedings (Annexure A7) that the assessment for mine blast injury has been based on the DCMB held in April 2000 and no further assessment of the same was done. There being no change in the degree of disability and as lump sum compensation for the same had been paid to the applicant, that disability was not to be considered for any further pensionary benefits or reliefs in accordance with regulations. Therefore, in our view, for the grant of disability pension on retirement, only Bronchial Asthma should have bee