IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 12.03.2026 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...PETITIONERS Versus EX SEPOY KEWAL SINGH AND ANR . . . RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI PRESENT: Ms. Neha Jain, Senior Panel counsel for the petitioners.

****

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral)

1. In the present petition, challenge is to the impugned order dated 03.10.2019 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent No.2-Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench Chandigarh (in short, ‘the Tribunal’) by which, respondent No.1 has been allowed the benefit of disability element of disability pension alongwith benefit of rounding off of the disability element of disability pension from 20 % to 50% for life, w.e.f. 16.06.2003.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon the report of medical examination of the respondent No. 1 to contend that though the disability of “Generalised Tonic Colonic Seizure-67” has been found to be existing in respondent No.1, and the said disability was assessed by the Release Medical Board @ 20% for life and the same was assessed as ‘neither attributable to Military Service nor aggravated by the Military service’ and hence, the grant of benefit of disability pension to respondent No. 1 by placing reliance upon the judgment of Tribunal in Civil Appeal No. 164 of 1993 (Arising out of SLP No. 4233 of 1992), Ex. Sapper Mohinder Singh vs. Union of India and another, decided on 15.01.1993 , is arbitrary and illegal. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that even the benefit of rounding off of disability pension @ 50% against 20% for life has been wrongly granted to respondent No. 1 in terms of Union of India and others vs. Ram Avtar, 2014 SCC Online SC 1761

3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the case file with her able assistance.

4. It is a conceded fact that at the time when respondent No.1 was invalidated out from service on 15.06.2003, he had rendered approximately 09 years 09 months and 11 days of service with the petitioners-Union of India. It is also a conceded fact that at the time when respondent No. 1 joined the armed forces i.e. on 01.09.1993, he was medically examined and was found not to be suffering from any such disease and was found to be medically fit but at the time of his invalidation on 15.06.2003, he was found to be suffering from disability of “Generalised Tonic Colonic Seizure-67”. The said fact had been made the basis by the Tribunal while granting benefit to the respondent No.1 by placing reliance upon the judgment of in Ex.

Sapper Mohinder Singh’s case (Supra) and Ram Avtar’s case (Supra)

5. As for the grievance of petitioners qua grant of benefit of disability element of disability pension to respondent No.1, it should be noted that as per judgment in Dharamvir Singh vs. Union of India and others, (2013) 7 SCC 316 , in a case where army personnel is found to be fit at the time of enrolment, and has later been found to be contracted with a disease, same is presumed to have been contracted with during the time such personnel was rendering service in military and as such same is to be attributed to military service or be regarded as having been aggravated by military service. And the said presumption in favour of army personnel emerges from Rule 5 and 9 of the “Entitlement Rules for Causality Pensionary Awards, 1982’, which gives the benefit of presumption of such in favour of army personnel. The relevant para Nos.30, 32 and 33 of the judgment in Dharamvir Singh’s case (supra) are as under:-

“30. In the present case it is undisputed that no note of any disease has been recorded at the time of appellant's acceptance for military service. The respondents have failed to bring on record any document to suggest that the appellant was under treatment for such a disease or by hereditary he is suffering from such disease. In absence of any note in the service record at the time of