Ex Nk Shimbhu Singh Nathawat (Army) vs UOI & Others on 28 April 2026

**ORDER**

**28.04.2026**

**MA No 706/2019**

1. the applicant has filed this OA praying for condonation of delay of 28 years in filing the OA, which would be considered alongwith the OA.

**OA No 144/2020**

2. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the applicant has filed this OA praying for directing the Respondents to restore the disability element of disability of the applicant by granting it wef 17/10/1995 and, thereafter, the same be rounded off to 50% in tune with the policy laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramavtar, with interest @10%. He has also prayed for award of cost of the application in his favour.

1. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the applicant are that the applicant was enrolled in the Army (Corps of EME) on 23/12/1980 in medically fit state. There is no note of any disability made by the Medical Board in the applicant's dossier and he remained medically fit all throughout his career in the Army except in the year 1984, when he had suffered from peptic ulcer due to climatic conditions and environmental hazards while posted in Tripura. The applicant was discharged from service on 11/10/1991 after rendering 10 years, 10 months and eight days of service. Based on the assessment made by the RMB, the applicant was granted disability pension for two years at the rate of 20%, which was extended till 16/10/1995. However, based on the RSMB held in the month of October 1995, which assessed the disability of the applicant @ less than 20%, the disability pension of the applicant was discontinued, wef 16/10/1995. The applicant further submitted that the applicant is eligible for grant of disability pension in terms of judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sukhvinder Singh Vs UOI & Ors, Civil Appeal No 5605 of 2010, decided on 10/8/2015, amongst others. Having been aggrieved, the applicant has filed this OA, praying for grant of relief.

4. During the course of final hearing, counsel for the applicant has assiduously submitted that the applicant was discharged from service prematurely owing to the disability suffered by him while in service and, hence, discontinuation of his disability pension was illegal and the applicant deserves to be granted disability pension with effect from the date it was discontinued arbitrarily.

5. The Respondents have filed a Reply Statement. While not disputing the basic facts, the Respondents have stated that the applicant was discharged from service on 11/10/1991 being placed in Low Medical Category lower than 'A' and not upto the prescribed military physical standards under Item III (v) and Sub Clause 2 A to Rule 13 (3) of Army Rules 1954. Since the applicant was in low medical category, CEE (Permanent) for the disability, "Non Ulcer Dyspepsia" the duly constituted RMB assessed the disability @ 20% for two years and considered it as aggravated by military service. Besides Service Element for life, the applicant was also granted disability element of disability pension @20% wef 01/11/1991 to 23/6/1993. Based on the appeal of the applicant disability element of disability pension of the applicant, disability element was granted till 16/10/1995 vide PPO dated 03/1/1996. Further RSMB held on 27/7/1996, assessed the disability of the applicant @20% for two years wef 27/7/1996 including for the Intervening Period wef 16/10/1995 to 27/7/1996. However, MA(P)/PCDA (P) on their own volition, rejected the claim of the applicant by reducing the percentage of disability to less than 20% and discontinued the disability element wef 17/10/1995 for ten years vide their letter dated 16/1/1997. Decision was duly communicated to the applicant with an advice to him to prefer an appeal, if so desired, but he did not prefer any appeal. To assess the disability of the applicant beyond 26/7/2006, Record Office had forwarded relevant medical documents to MH, Jaipur under intimation to the applicant to appear before the medical authorities to assess his disability, but the applicant did not appear before the medical board for assessment of his disability.

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

It is apparent from the record that the applicant was discharged from service wef 31/10/1991 being placed in Low Medical Category due to the disability "Non Ulcer Dyspepsia", under Rule 13 (3) item III (v) and Sub Rule 2 A of Army Rules 1954. The duly constituted RMB assessed the said disability of the Applicant @ 20% for two years and considered it as aggravated by military service. He had rendered 10 years, 10 months and eight days of service. While Service Element was granted for life to the applicant, he was also granted disability element of disability pension @20% wef 01/11/1991 to 23/6/1993, which was further extended till 16/10/1995 Further RSMB held on 27/7/1996, assessed the disability of the applicant @20% for two years wef 27/7/1996 including for the intervening period wef 16/10/1995 to 27/7/1996. However, the MA (P)/PCDA (P) overturned the assessment of the duly constituted RSMB and rejected the due benefit of the applicant, by reducing the assessment @ 14% for ten years and discontinued the disability element wef 17/10/1995 to 26/7/2006. For continuation or otherwise of disability element of disability pension beyond 26/7/2016 to the applicant, Record Office had forwarded the medical documents of the applicant to the MH Jaipur for holding a RSMB, however, the applicant did not turn up before the medical authorities for assessment of his disability and accordingly, his disability element continued to be not granted in his favour.

8. We are of the view that arbitrary decision taken by the MA (P)/PCDA (P) in not granting disability element of disability pension to the applicant by reducing the assessment @ less than as against @ 20% by the RSMB held on 27/7/1996, it was not in consonance with the Hon'ble Apex Court Order passed in the case of Spr Mohinder Singh and the applicant is eligible for grant of disability element of disability pension @20% for two years including for the intervening period, as assessed by the RSMB. The vehement prayer of the Counsel for the applicant during the final hearing for grant of disability element of disability pension for life wef the date of its discontinuation has no locus standi as the applicant himself was at fault by ignoring the advice of Record Office and not appearing before the RSMB in 1996, resulting in non assessment of the disability of the applicant in the year 2006 leading to non grant of disability element in his favour.

9. In f view of above, the Respondents are directed to grant disability element of disability pension @20% wef 16/10/1995 to 27/7/1998 alongwith rounding off benefits to 50% wef 01/1/1996 to the applicant as the same was denied to the applicant for no fault of his. The arrears shall be paid to the applicant within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order, failing which, the applicant shall be entitled to receive interest @6% till its actual date of payment.

10. Further, since the disability of the applicant, **"Non Ulcer Dyspepsia"** with which the applicant was discharged from service in low medical category on medical ground before completion of his normal tenure, which was assessed @20% for two years and was considered as Aggravated by military service, we deem it appropriate to bring the Applicant before a fresh Re-assessment Medical Board (RAMB) to assess his present degree of disablement of this particular disability.

11. We, therefore, direct the Respondents to constitute a onetime Re-assessment Medical Board (RAMB) at the designated Military Hospital for the examination of the Applicant towards the aforesaid purpose within eight months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order and to inform the Applicant the date and venue for his presence. The RAMB will give its opinion on the present medical condition of the Applicant for the said Disability, **"Non Ulcer Dyspepsia", only with which he was discharged from service in Low Medical Category** and assess the degree of Disability and the probable duration of the degree of disablement alongwith any other observations relevant to the case. The copy of RAMB proceedings shall be placed before the Competent Authority for their consideration in accordance with extant rules and regulations. Before departing we make it clear that in case the Disability Element of Disability Pension is proposed to be granted on the basis of RAMB recommendations, the disability element of disability pension shall be granted wef the date of holding of the RAMB alongwith rounding off benefits given the fact that there has been an inordinate delay of approximately three decades in approaching this Tribunal since rejection of his disability element coupled with the fact that the applicant himself was at fault for not turning up before the RSMB, as advised.

12. OA is disposed off accordingly. No order on costs.

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

(SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J)

cda/-