Ex Hav Ram Niwas (Army) vs UOI & Others on 26 March 2026

O R D E R

26.03.2026 MA No 504/2019

1. The applicant has filed this MA praying for condonation of delay of 10 years, three months and four days involved in filing the OA. The MA would be considered alongwiththe main OA.

OA No 354/2019

2. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the applicant has filed this OA praying for directing the Respondents No 2 to release Army Groups Insurance Benefits for the 30% disability of the applicant alongwith interest @12%

per annum from the date of discharge of the applicant. He has also prayed for grant of any other relief as applicable to the applicant as also award cost of the application.

3. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the applicant are that the applicant was enrolled in the Army on 06/8/1984 and was discharged from service on 31/8/2008 after serving for 24 years and 25 days, for which he was granted service pension for life. While in service the applicant suffered from a disability which was assessed @more than 20% for life at the time of his discharge from service. However, AGIF benefits for the disability has not been paid to the applicant. Having been aggrieved, the applicant has filed this OA praying for relief.

4. The Respondents have filed their respective Reply Statements. Respondent No 2, ie, AGIF, New Delhi, has stated that the applicant was discharged from service wef 31/8/2008 on fulfilling the conditions of his enrolment under Rule 13 (3) item III (i) of Army Rules 1954. Consequent to his discharge, he was granted service pension for the qualifying service, which has been revised from time to time. Since the applicant was in low medical category for his disability, “PAN Facial Injury Fracture Maxilla Zygoma and Mandible ((Optd)” the RMB assessed the said disability @20% for life and considered it as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. He was not granted disability element of disability pension in terms of Parra 173 of Pension Regulations for the Army 1961, Part I. However, based on the First Appeal preferred by the applicant, the Appellate Committee on First Appeals accepted the disability of the applicant as attributable to military service and @20% for life and accordingly, the applicant was granted disability element of disability pension for life wef 01/9/2008. Respondents have further submitted that the applicant is not eligible for grant of AGIF benefits in terms of extant policy on the subject.

5. Respondent No 2, ie, Army Groups Insurance Fund, has also fileda detailed Reply Statement and has submitted that since the applicant was discharged from service on completion of his terms of engagement and not on any medical grounds nor invalided out from service, as per eligibility rules of the AGIF , ie, in terms of Paragraph 59 (a) and (e) of Army Order No 23/2002/AGI, the applicant is not entitled for grant of disability benefit under disability benefit scheme of Army Group Insurance Fund. The applicant is in receipt of both service and disability pension. Moreover, AGIF functions under its own Rules and Bye-Laws of the Society which are approved by the Board of Governors and the Army Act, 1950 has no application on AGIF. It is not even registered with Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) and the AGIF is not carrying out insurance business but it is carrying out a social responsibility for the upkeep of morale and well being of Army personnel. The Group scheme was designed to be run by pooling in money from all the members of the scheme and giving payouts to eligiblemembers out of such money and continues to do so even today. The Govt approved deductions of monthly subscription for the scheme from the pay and allowances of the members under Rule 205 (b) of the Army Rules, 1954. To buttress their view point, they have cited Order dated 30/8/2017 passed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal in the case of Major Manmohan Krishnan (Retd) Vs UOI &Ors, wherein the contention of the AGIF that the disability benefit under the Scheme is not applicable to an applicant who was discharged/released at his own request in Low Medical Category was upheld. The appeal filed by the applicant therein before the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No 1667 of 2018, was also dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide Order dated 08/5/2020, giving finality on the issue. ReviewPetition No 823/2020 in CA No 1667/2018 was also dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide Order dated 08/5/2020.

6. During the course of hearing, Counsel for the Respondent No 2, ie, Army Group Insurance Fund has placed on record copies of Orders passed by the Principal Bench and other coordinate Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, wherein plea of the applicants therein was rejected on the ground that the applicants were not invalided out from service, but were discharged from service and, hence, not entitled to the benefit of disability benefits under Army Group Insurance Scheme. The Counsel has also stated that the Appeal No 35935/2015 filed by them before the Hon’ble Apex Court against the Order dated 19/2/2014 passed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces with regard to jurisdiction of Armed Forces Tribunal to adjudicate upon the claims of the applicant for grant of AGIF benefits have been withdrawn from the Apex Court and, therefore, AFTs can adjudicate upon the matters relating to AGIF.

7. We have heard the counsels for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

8. It is evident from the material on record that the applicant was discharged from service on completion of his terms of engagement after rendering 24 years of service for which he was granted service pension for life. The RMB assessed the disability of the applicant, “Pan Facial Injury Fracture Maxilla Zygoma and Mandible (Optd)” @20% for life and considered it as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. While initial claim of the applicant for grant of disability element of disability pension was rejected, based on the First Appeal of the applicant, the competent authority considered it as attributable to military service and @20% for life and the applicant was granted relief for life. Perusal of record reveals that the scheme is not admissible to such personnel :- (a) whose disability is detected at the time of proceeding on normal pension/discharge/release on completion of terms of engagement or service limits for the rank/age of superannuation; and (b) who serveupto the laid down age of retirement or service limit for the rank even if with disability (20% and above).

9. In view of the foregoing and since the applicant was discharged from service wef 31/8/2008 on fulfilling the conditions of his enrolment under Rule 13 (3) item III (i) of Army Rules 1954 and is in receipt of service pension and disability element of disability pension for life, the applicant is not eligible for grant of any disability benefits under the scheme of AGIF. He has already been granted admissible insurance maturity benefits amounting to Rs 1,38,194/- (Rupees One Lac Thirty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Ninety Four only) at the time of his discharge from service by the AGIF through cheque dated 18/8/2008 which was realised on 17/9/2008. We, therefore, find no illegality or infirmity in this matter wherein AGIF disability benefit has been denied to the applicant. The prayer of the applicant for grant of disability benefits under AGIF benefits has no merit and is, therefore, rejected.

10. The OA is dismissed. No order on costs.

11. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed off.

(SANJIV MITTAL)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

cda/-