Disability pensions require established causal connections with military service, with medical assessments needing thorough reasoning for denying claims; presumption of service-related conditions has evolved under recent entitlement rules.

JUDGMENT

Ms. Shalinder Kaur, J. -

These petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging different but comparable orders passed by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (herein referred to as, 'Tribunal'), whereby the learned Tribunal allowed the Original Applications (O.As.) filed by the respondents herein, holding that the respondents are entitled to the grant of disability pension for their respective disabilities.

2. For the sake of convenience, and since the issue involved in these petitions pertains to the disability suffered by the Armed Forces personnel due to some illness while being in military service, the facts of W.P.(C) 140 of 2024 are discussed herein to establish the context pertaining to the present batch of petitions.

3. The condensed factual overview is that the respondent was commissioned into the Indian Army on 10.06.1989 and retired from service on 30.06.2021 upon attaining the age of superannuation. On 18.01.2012, while the respondent was posted at Headquarters 41 Artillery Division, Pune, he was diagnosed with Diabetes Mellitus Type-II and was recommended to be placed in the Low Medical Category (P2-Permanent). However, he completed the full length of his service.

4. At the time of his retirement, since the respondent was placed in the Low Medical Category, he was examined by a duly constituted Release Medical Board (RMB). As per the RMB proceedings dated 24.02.2021, the disability of the respondent, namely Diabetes Mellitus Type-II, was assessed at 20% for life and was held to be neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. Resultantly, he was held not entitled to grant of disability pension upon his superannuation from service on 30.06.2021.

5. The respondent, therefore, filed an initial disability claim, which was adjudicated and rejected by the Competent Authority vide letter dated 12.08.2021. Aggrieved by the decision of the Competent Authority, on 01.10.2021, the respondent preferred a First Appeal against the rejection of the disability pension claim, which also was rejected by the Appellate Committee on First Appeals vide its letter dated 29.04.2022.

6. Dissatisfied by the rejection of his claim for disability pension, the respondent filed an O.A., bearing O.A. No. 1021/2022.

7. The learned Tribunal allowed the O.A., basing its decision on Dharamvir Singh v. Union of India & Ors, (2013) 7 SCC 316, while holding that the disease would be deemed to be 'attributable to service' when there was no record at the time of recruitment indicating that the respondent was suffering from any such medical condition. Accordingly, the respondent was held eligible for grant of the disability pension. The learned Tribunal directed the petitioners to grant to the respondent the benefit of the disability element of pension at 20% for life, to be rounded off to 50% for life, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ram Avtar, Civil Appeal No. 418 of 2012

8. The petitioners, Union of India, through the present petitions, assail the Impugned Orders passed by the learned Tribunal and have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court challenging the same on the ground that the RMB had clearly opined that the respondent's medical condition was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service, thus, according to the petitioners, the respondent is not entitled to disability element of pension.

Submissions On Behalf Of The Learned Attorney General On Behalf Of The Petitioners:

9. The learned Attorney General submitted that in the present batch of petitions, none of the individuals have been 'invalidated out of service'. Consequently, not a single one of them is, per se, eligible to be considered for the award of disability pension. He submitted that though individuals who are retained in service despite having a disability which is held to be attributable to or aggravated by military service, and assessed at not less than 20%,