The court dismissed a plea filed by the Union of India challenging an order of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), Lucknow bench, which had granted disability pension to the soldier.

he Allahabad High Court recently upheld an order directing the grant of disability pension to an Indian Army personnel who was discharged from service on the grounds of hypertension, while observing that the mere fact that a disease was detected at a “peace station” cannot be a ground to deny pensionary benefits.

A division bench of Justices Alok Mathur and Amitabh Kumar Rai dismissed a plea filed by the Union of India challenging an order of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), Lucknow bench, which had granted disability pension to the soldier.

“Merely because the disease was detected at a peace station is of no consequence while determining the aspect of attributability or aggravation. Accordingly, endorsing in a routine manner that the disease was detected during peace posting is totally illegal, arbitrary and in no manner justifies the denial of disability pension to the respondent,” the bench remarked in the order dated April 29.

 Justices Alok Mathur and Amitabh Kumar Rai

Discharged from service

• The soldier had joined the Indian Army in February 1994 and was discharged in February 2020 after being placed in low medical category due to primary hypertension assessed at 30 per cent disability for life.
• However, the release medical board had opined that the disease was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service, leading to rejection of his disability pension claim.
• Before the tribunal, the soldier argued that he had been medically fit at the time of enrolment and developed the disease only during service.
• The Union government, on the other hand, contended that the illness surfaced while he was posted at a peace station and therefore could not be linked to military service.
• The tribunal rejected the arguments of the Union government and held that the applicant’s disability should be considered as aggravated by military service, while granting the relief.
• Before the high court the Union government contended that the judgment of the tribunal was contrary to the opinion given by the medical board, where it had opined that the disease contracted by the soldier was neither attributable nor aggravated by the military service.
• On the other hand, the counsel for the respondent argued that the tribunal rightly considered the fact that even when armed personnel are posted in peace areas, there is also stress and strain due to such posting, since, even at a peace station, there is pressure of rigorous training and stress.

Also Read | Army discharged him for schizophrenia, denied disability pension; his widow wins in court after 4 decades

Devoid of reasons

The bench observed that the medical board had merely stated that the disease was detected during a peace posting and failed to provide adequate reasons for denying attributability or aggravation by service.

“If the serviceman is discharged from service or denied the disability pension on the basis of a medical opinion which is devoid of reasons, it would strike at the root of the action taken by the authority and such action cannot be sustained in law,” the court noted.

The court also found that the Army officer had not applied for discharge but it was the authority itself that, after observing his condition, decided to discharge him from service.

It added that where the serviceman himself had not applied for discharge, but has been discharged by the authority, the onus of proving the disability and grounds of denying disability pension would lie heavily on the authority.

Story continues below. Subscribe to see fewer ads.

“It can be said that the authorities have failed to discharge the burden of establishing that the employee deserved to be discharged from service on account of such illness without any benefit of pension and such action has to be considered arbitrary and liable to be interfered with,” the court remarked.

The court emphasised that the medical board ought to have taken into account important factors while considering the case for the grant of disability pension.

It added that the onus lay upon them to discuss and consider such factors and give adequate reasons before rejecting the claim for the grant of disability pension.

Finding no infirmity in the AFT’s order, the bench directed that the respondent be granted disability pension with all consequential benefits.