Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, K. RAJASEKAR, JJ.
Union of India, represented by the Secretary Government of India Ministry of Defence and Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
Mr. G. Madavan, JC 219537E Ex Sub G. Madavan – Respondent
W.P.No.5166 of 2024
Decided On : 04-02-2025
(A) Pension Regulations for the Army - Regulation 37 - Disability pension - Claim for disability element of pension rejected as disabilities were neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service - Tribunal's order granting relief quashed. (Paras 4, 8, 12)
(B) Medical assessment - The medical board's assessment must consider the nature of disability and service conditions, not solely medical opinions. (Paras 9, 10)
Facts of the case:
The respondent, after 27 years of service, claimed a disability pension based on various health conditions assessed at 50%, which were deemed unrelated to military service.
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal failed to consider the eligibility criteria under Regulation 37, leading to an erroneous grant of relief.
Issues: Whether the respondent is eligible for a disability pension under Regulation 37 given the nature of his disabilities.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that disabilities must be attributable to or aggravated by military service for pension eligibility, and the Tribunal's reliance on a Supreme Court judgment was misplaced due to differing facts.
Result: Writ petition allowed.
ORDER
(S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
Under assail is the order dated 03.03.2022 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench at Chennai in O.A.No.127 of 2020.
2. The respondent instituted original application claiming disability element of pension @ 50% duly broadbanding it to 75% w.e.f. 01.04.2017 along with arrears and interest.
3. The respondent was enrolled in the Indian Army on 24.12.1990 and discharged from service on 31.03.2017 on completion of 27 years, 3 months and 8 days. It is not in dispute that the respondent is in receipt of service pension. On 10.10.2016, the Release Medical Board assessed the disability of the respondent (i) Obesity @ 1-5% (ii) Type II Diabetes Mellitus @ 20% (iii) Non Alcoholic Fatty Liver disease @ 1-5% and (iv) Coronary Artery disease @ 30% with composite assessment @ 50% for life and opined that the disability was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. The respondent's representation for grant of disability pension was rejected on 01.04.2017 by the competent authority stating that the disability is neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. The appellate authority also rejected his appeal on 10.06.2019.
4. Question arises whether the respondent is eligible to claim disability element of pension along with service pension under Regulation 37 of the Pension Regulations for the Army?
5. The learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the petitioners stated that the case of the respondent is not falling under the eligibility criteria contemplated under Regulation 37 of the Pension Regulations for the Army and therefore his case was rejected in consonance with the provisions. He would continue to say that the Tribunal has not considered the eligibility criteria contemplated under Regulation 37 and thus the Union of India preferred the present writ petition before this Court.
6. Regulation 37 of the Pension Regulations for the Army denotes disability element in addition to retiring pension to officer retired on attaining the prescribed age of retirement, which reads as under:-
“37. (a) An officer who retires on attaining the prescribed age of retirement or on completion of tenure, if found suffering on retirement, from a disability which is either attributable to or aggravated by military service and so recorded by Release Medical Board, may be granted in addition to the retiring pension admissible, a disability element from the date of retirement if the degree of disability is accepted at 20% or more.
(b) ....”
7. The above provision in clear terms indicates that a disability which is either attributable to or aggravated by military service and so recorded by Release Medical Board, may be taken into consideration for grant of disability pension. In the case of the respondent, the disability and the reasons recorded by the competent authority read as under:-
| Sl No | Disability(s) | Reason(s) |
| (i) | Obesity | The ID is a lifestyle disease due to unhealthy dietary habits and lack of physical exercise. Hence th ID is conceded as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. |
| (ii) | DM Type-II | In the instant case, onset was in a peace station and the applicant continued to serve in Peace Station till his discharge. Hence the ID is conceded as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service in terms of Para 26, Chap VI of GMO 2002, amendment 2008 and ER 2008. |
| (iii) | Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease | The ID is characterised by excessive fat storage in heaptocytes in people with little or no alcohol consumption. In the instant case obesity and diabetes mellitus are both not relate to service factors and accordingly, non alcoholic. Hence the ID is conceded as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. |
| (iv) | CAD | Onset of ID was in peace station at the time of onset and his 14 days charter of duties does not reflect any exceptional stress and strain. The ID is held aggravated if an individual serves in field/HAA/C1 Ops following the onset, which was not the case here. |
Disability pensions require that disabilities be attributable to or aggravated by military service, as per Regulation 37 of the Pension Regulations for the Army.
Disability pension eligibility requires the disability to be attributable to or aggravated by military service, and claims must adhere to statutory limitation periods.
Eligibility for disability pension requires clear evidence that the disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service, not just medical authority's opinion.
The court held that the Medical Board's opinion on disability attribution is final unless contradicted by substantial evidence, emphasizing the need for a clear connection between the disability and ....
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 ....
Disability pension claims must establish a direct connection to military service, with the burden of proof on the claimant, especially under new regulations.
Disability pension claims must be substantiated by evidence proving the disability's connection to military service, as medical board opinions are final unless contradicted.
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
