Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
ATTAU RAHMAN MASOODI, OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, JJ.
No. 15447310w Ex Rect , Raushan Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
The Armed Forces Tribunal Regional Bench Lko. And Others – Respondent
Writ A No. 7699 of 2023
Decided on : 09-10-2023
DISABILITY PENSION - Military Service - Pension Regulations, 1961, Entitlement Rules - The court discussed the Regulations for Medical Services Armed Forces, 1983, Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982, and Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961. The court highlighted the conditions for granting disability pension, the onus of proof, and the determination of whether a disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service. The court emphasized the need for a reasonable causal connection between the injuries resulting in disability and the military service.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an Indian Army recruit, was found to be suffering from 'Primary Generalised Epilepsy' and was invalidated out of service. The petitioner's claim for disability pension was rejected, leading to a series of appeals and applications before the Tribunal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no reasonable causal connection between the petitioner's disability and military service, and upheld the dismissal of the claim for disability pension by the Tribunal.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the attribution of the petitioner's disability to military service, the onus of proof, and the application of the relevant Regulations and Rules for granting disability pension.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for a reasonable causal connection between the injuries resulting in disability and the military service, as well as the onus of proof on the claimant for disability pension.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
JUDGMENT :
Om Prakash Shukla, J.
(1) The challenge in the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to an order passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) on July 01, 2021 whereby, Original Application No. 164 of 2019 filed by the applicant/petitioner arising out of letters dated 27.02.2016 and 19.01.2018 rejecting his claim for grant of disability pension, was dismissed.
(2) Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the applicant/petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Army on April 28, 2014. On November 18, 2014, the Invaliding Medical Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘Board’) found the petitioner to be suffering from ‘Primary Generalised Epilepsy’, which disability was assessed at 20% for life. The opinion of the Board was that disability was ‘neither attributable to nor aggravated’ (NANA) by military service and consequently, the petitioner was invalidated out/discharged from army service on January 01, 2015. The assessment of disability pension of the petitioner was also adjudicated and it was opined by the competent authority after assessment that the net assessment qualifying for disability pension assessed as Nil for life. This decision of the competent authority for non-qualify of the disability pension of the petitioner was communicated to him vide letter dated 27.02.2016.
(3) Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order of discharge dated January 01, 2015, the petitioner had filed an appeal dated 29.01.2015, which was rejected vide order dated 23.06.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed Original Application No. 332 of 2015 before the Tribunal, seeking to reinstate him in service along with seniority and consequent benefits including arrears of salary and continuity in service. Vide judgment/order 07.04.2017, the learned Tribunal dismissed the said original application.
(4) Moreover, against the decision of rejection of disability pension dated 27.02.2016, the petitioner had filed appeal dated 28.08.2017, which was examined and rejected by the competent authority and the same was also communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 19.01.2018.
(5) Against the rejection of the claim of the petitioner to grant him disability pension vide letters dated 27.02.2016 and 19.01.2018, he had filed Original Application No. 164 of 2019 before the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal, vide judgment/order dated July 01, 2021, dismissed the said original application. It is this order dated July 01, 2021, which has been challenged in this writ petition.
(6) Heard Shri Anshuman Srivastava, learned Counsel representing the petitioner and Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate/Deputy Solicitor General of India, assisted by Shri Varun Pandey, representing the Union of India/respondents no. 2 to 5.
(7) Learned Counsel representing the petitioner has submitted that the declaration of the Release Medical Board that the disease of the petitioner was "neither attributable to nor aggravated by service" was arbitrary and illegal as the Board had not scrupulously followed the Regulations and decided the case in clear violation of the rules framed thereunder. The assessment of disability for attributability is to be ascertained in accordance with Regulation No. 153 of the Regulations for Medical Services Armed Forces, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Regulations, 1983’) and Rules 5, 14(b), 14(c) and 15 of Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Entitlement Rules’) prescribed under Appendix-II coupled with the rules specified in Annexure-III to Appendix-II. According to the learned. Counsel, the Board flouted all the relevant rules and regulations and arbitrarily decided the case of the petitioner as it ignored the vital fact that the petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Army on 28.04.2014 after medically and physically found fit by the medical officers at the time of recruitment. According to him, the onset of disability
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of sound physical and mental condition upon entering military service, the onus of proof on the employer to show non-entitlement, a....
Disability pension claims require proof of service-related causation; mere diagnosis does not suffice without evidence of attribution to military service per applicable regulations.
The burden to prove that a disease or disability is neither attributable to nor aggravated by service conditions rests entirely on the employer. A medical board cannot deny pension benefits by merely....
Appeal Medical Board being the expert body which takes all factors into account, its opinion has to be given weight.
The court established that ex-servicemen with disabilities over 20% are entitled to disability pensions, emphasizing the presumption of service connection and the burden of proof on medical authoriti....
The Medical Board's opinion on disability attributability must include cogent reasoning, and the burden to prove a causal link lies with the military, not the claimant.
Disability Pension – Question of entitlement of soldier to disability pension cannot be determined on the basis of medical examination conducted 20 years after his discharge from service.
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
