$~85 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 14.01.2026 + W.P.(C) 475/2026 UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Abhishek Khanna, SPC and Mr.

Ausafur Rahman, Adv.

versus

677262 EX SGT RAJKISHORE RETD .....Respondent Through: Ms. Deepika Shrama, Mr. Baljeet Singh and Mr. A.K. Chaudhary, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL CM APPL. 2334/2026 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 475/2026 & CM APPL. 2333/2026(Stay

3. This petition lays a challenge to an order dated 15.05.2023 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (Tribunal) in Original Application (OA) No.408/2022, whereby the Tribunal has allowed the OA filed by the respondent herein by stating in paragraph 13 and 14 as under:-

“13. Therefore, in view of our analysis, the OA is allowed and Respondents are directed to grant benefit of disability element of pension compositely @ 20% for life rounded off to 50% in view of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Union of India versus Ram Avtar (supra) from the date of retirement i.e. 30.06.2021. The arrears shall be disbursed to the applicant within four months of receipt of this order failing which it shall earn interest @ 6% p.a. till the actual date of payment.

14. Consequently, the O.A. 408/2022 is allowed. During the course of the hearing the applicant has withdrawn rest of the disabilities and has only pressed for Diabetes Mellitus (Old).”

4. The facts to be noted from the petition are that the respondent herein was enrolled in the Indian Air Force on 08.03.1983. He retired from the Indian Air Force on 31.05.2021, after serving for 38 years, 02 months and 24 days of qualifying service. The Release Medical Board (RMB) dated 08.09.2020 held that the respondent is fit to be discharged from service in composite low medical category A4G4(P) for the disability Diabetes Mellitus Type-II at 20% for life while the qualifying element for disability pension was recorded as NIL for life on account of disabilities being treated as Neither Attributable to Nor Aggravated (NANA) by military service. The claim of the respondent for the grant of disability pension was rejected on

22.06.2021 by taking the stand as already reflected in the above paragraph.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would reiterate the stand taken by the respondents before the Tribunal. He additionally states that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is per incuriam as the provisions contained in the Entitlement Rules, 2008, were not considered in perspective inasmuch as the Tribunal has failed to reconcile its decision with the amended Entitlement Rules, 2008, wherein the general presumption to be drawn in order to ascertain the principle of attributable to or aggravated by the military service has been done away with.

6. We are not in agreement with the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. This we say so for the reason that this Court in paragraph nos. 9, 10 & 13 in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. 1481129 P Ex Hav Ram Kumar, 2026:DHC:197-DB has held which we reproduce as under:-

“9. In W.P.(C) 88/2026 titled Union of India v. 781466 Ex. SGT Krishna Kumar Dwivedi, decided by this Bench on 06.01.2026, our attention was drawn to the authoritative judgments of the coordinate Benches of this Court passed in W.P.(C) 3545/2025 titled Union of India v. Ex. Sub Gawas Anil Madso, 2025: DHC: 2021-DB and W.P.(C) 140/2024 titled Union of India vs. Col. Balbir Singh (Retd.) and other connected matters, 2025: DHC: 5082-DB, which have conclusively held that even under 2008 Entitlement Rules, an officer who suffers from a disease at the time of his release and applies for disability pension within 15 years from release of service, is ordinarily entitled to disability pension and he does not have any onus to prove the sai