Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, K.RAJASEKAR, JJ
S. No. C/6877122 Ex Hav D.J. Jaya Paul S/o S.D. Deva Dass – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Represented By Its Secretary To Government Of India – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Under assail is the order dated 17th June, 2022 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench at Chennai in O.A. No.12 of 2021.
2. The original applicant is the writ petitioner before this Court. The relief sought for before the Tribunal is challenging the rejection order dated 29.02.2020 passed by the fourth respondent in the first appeal, declining grant of disability pension to the petitioner and to direct the respondents to grant disability pension with effect from 24.07.1970, the date of discharge.
3. The facts in brief, as stated by the original applicant before the Tribunal, would reveal that he was enrolled in the Indian Army on 12.09.1962 and discharged from service on 24.07.1970, after rendering 7 years, 10 months and 12 days of service. The Invaliding Medical Board assessed the petitioner's disability due to “Neurosis” at 20% for one year and opined that the disability is neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. Thus, the petitioner's claim for disability pension was rejected by the competent authority as early as on 07.01.1971 itself.
4. First appeal was preferred on 07.01.2020 seeking grant of disability pension. However, the 4th respond
An application for disability pension under the Armed Forces Tribunal Act must be filed within three years from the rejection order, and the Medical Board's assessment is binding unless proven errone....
The court upheld the Tribunal’s decision that the medical board's assessment precluded the granting of disability pension as it found the condition was neither attributable to nor aggravated by milit....
Disability pension eligibility requires the disability to be attributable to or aggravated by military service, and claims must adhere to statutory limitation periods.
The High Court clarifies the procedural rights of an appellant regarding disability pension claims, ensuring unprejudiced consideration by appellate authorities.
The court established that the burden of proof for disability pension claims lies with the employer, and the absence of evidence linking the condition to military service justifies the rejection of t....
The court established that the burden of proof regarding the attribution of disability to military service lies with the employer, and the presumption of sound health at enlistment is significant in ....
Invalid pension eligibility extends to Armed Forces personnel invalided before the relaxation cut-off, upholding fairness under constitutional provisions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
