Back
Dismisses 271 Appeals, Says Must Prove Disability Not Due to Service
In a significant ruling that reinforces the protective framework for disabled ex-servicemen, the on Tuesday dismissed 271 appeals filed by the challenging the grant of disability pension. A bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe held that the remains squarely on the to demonstrate that a disability is neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service.
The Court criticized the Union for filing a deluge of
, noting that most of the 271 matters were already dismissed on
in the past.
"The sad part of this litigation is that, out of around 271 Civil Appeals and Special Leave Petitions, most of them are barred by
,"
the bench observed.
Background of the Dispute
The cases arose from claims by retired soldiers who were denied disability pension by . The RMBs classified their disabilities as "neither attributable nor aggravated" (NANA) by military service, a finding that triggered denial of pension. The soldiers then approached the or various , which overturned the NANA findings and granted them disability pension. The challenged these decisions before the .
The core legal issue was whether the , which replaced the , fundamentally altered the beneficial framework that previously favored soldiers. The Union argued that the removed the and required proof of a between disability and service.
Arguments and Counter-Arguments
Attorney General , appearing for the Union, contended that the marked a significant departure by deleting the earlier presumption that a soldier is sound at entry and that any deterioration is due to service. He argued that the landmark judgment in , which relied on the , could not be mechanically applied to cases governed by the regime.
The respondents—ex-servicemen represented by multiple counsels including and —countered that the introduced only cosmetic changes and did not alter the core scheme. They pointed out that Rule 7 of the still placed the onus on the establishment, and that on and unknown causes remained intact.
Legal Analysis: No Fundamental Shift
The conducted a detailed comparison of the and across key subjects such as presumption at entry, , , and . It concluded that while the removed the automatic presumption of fitness, they did not dismantle the .
“The mere addition of a causal requirement and a removal of the presumption that when a member joins service healthy, and, if, he leaves with a disability, it ought to be attributable to the military service, does not, by itself, change the core scheme of the Entitlement Rules because the other broadly remain untouched,” the Court held.
The bench emphasized that the onus to prove that the disability is not attributable to service continues to lie on the employer for claims made within 15 years of discharge. For claims beyond 15 years, the burden shifts to the claimant. This interpretation aligns with the ’s report, which had criticized the arbitrary rejection of disability benefits and recommended withdrawal of such litigation.
Key Observations
The Court made several important observations:
“Even though Entitlement Rules removed the automatic presumption and strengthened the requirement of causal nexus, they did not dismantle the of the Rules, particularly the continued allocation of primary burden to the establishment and beneficial principles governing , and .”
On the applicability of Dharamvir Singh , the Court noted that it “cannot be mechanically applied to cases governed by the Entitlement Rules ” but also clarified that the decision does not create an that every disability manifested during service is attributable.
The Court also took note of the Union’s own data obtained under RTI, which showed that out of 2,997 appeals before the first appellate authority, 2,855 were rejected, and only 142 were accepted. This indicated a systemic pattern of denial.
Court's Decision and Implications
The dismissed all 271 appeals on both grounds of . It clarified that tribunals dealing with pending claims must closely examine the Medical Board’s opinion and reasons before deciding. However, the Court rejected the Union’s argument that the had fundamentally changed the law.
The ruling is expected to provide relief to thousands of ex-servicemen whose disability pension claims were rejected on . It also serves as a warning to the government against filing large numbers of that clog the judicial system.
The Court directed that no order as to costs be imposed, but made it clear that the Union must identify cases where tribunals had mechanically applied Dharamvir Singh without examining evidence, and raise appropriate objections in those specific instances.
