Col Anand Mehrotra (Retd) vs UOI & Others on 31 August 2026

1. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the applicant has filed this OA praying for directing the Respondents to grant disability element wef 01/12/2019 alongwith rounding off benefits from 80% to 100% for life with interest @8% per annum. He has also prayed for award of cost of the application.

2. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the applicant are that the applicant was commissioned in the Army on 19/12/1987 and was superannuated from service on 30/11/2019. Due to harsh service conditions in which the applicant served such as deserts, high altitude, mountains etc, including the operational area, the applicant suffered multiple disabilities, viz, Osteoarthritis Left Knee, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary disease, Primary Hypertension, Obesity, Type II Diabetes, Lacunar 

Infarct Lt (Thalamus) and Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea with obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome. The duly constituted RMB assessed the disability, "Osteoarthritis" @20% for life and considered it as aggravated by military service, while all other disabilities were considered as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service and assessed at composite 80% for life. However, despite the first disability considered as aggravated by military service, the applicant has not been granted the disability element for the same. In support of his arguments, the applicant has placed reliance on the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dharamvir Singh Vs UOI & Ors and UOI & Ors Vs Rajbir Singh, Civil Appeal No 2904 of 2011, decided on 13/2/2015, amongst others. Having been aggrieved, the applicant has filed this OA praying for relief.


3. The Respondents have filed a Reply Statement. While not disputing the basic facts, they have submitted that the applicant retired from Army service on 30/11/2019 on attaining the age of superannuation. Since the applicant was in low medical category, the duly constituted RMB assessed the disabilities of the applicant as given below :- <table border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td>(a) "Osteoarthritis Left Ankle" @20%</td> <td>for life and considered it as aggravated by military service.</td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td>(b) "Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease" @40%</td> <td></td> <td>- NANA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>(c) "Primary Hypertension" @30%</td> <td></td> <td>- NANA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>(d) "Obesity" @5%</td> <td></td> <td>- NANA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>(e) "Type II Diabetes Mellitus" @20%</td> <td></td> <td>- NANA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>(f) "Lacunar Infarct Lt Thalamus" @20%</td> <td></td> <td>- NANA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>(g) "Severe / Obstructive Sleep Apnea With Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome" @5%</td> <td></td> <td>- NANA</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

While the first disability has been assessed @20% for life, all other disabilities from serial (b) to (g) have been assessed at NIL for life for grant of disability pension, with Composite assessment for all these disabilities @80% for life.


4. Further, the initial claim of the applicant for grant of disability element was adjudicated by the Competent Authority and rejected the same on the ground that while the first disability from which the applicant was found suffering at the time of release from army service has been held as aggravated by service but does not fulfil the eligibility conditions and all other disabilities have been conceded as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. Hence, the eligibility conditions as laid down in existing rules/provision for grant of disability element are not fulfilled and, therefore, the claim for the same is "not approved", Annexure R/2. The Respondents have further submitted that the judgments on which reliance has been placed by the counsel for the applicant are not applicable in the case of the applicant herein as he was not invalided out from service on medical grounds, but was retired from army service on attaining the age of superannuation. In support of their arguments, the Respondents have placed reliance on the Judgment dated 23/5/2012 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UOI & Ors Vs Ex Rfn Ravinder Kumar, in which it is held that the opinion of the medical board should not be over ruled judiciously unless there is a very strong medical credence to do so. Respondents have further submitted that vide letter dated 19/8/2021, Annexure R/2, the applicant was advised to prefer a First Appeal against rejection of his disability element claim within six months from the date of receipt of the letter, but the applicant did not do so and rather took the recourse of sending a legal notice followed by filing an OA in the Hon'ble Tribunal for grant of disability element which is contradictory to Rule 14 (a) & (b) of Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Award 2008. In view of the factual statement made by the Respondents, they have prayed for dismissing the OA at admission stage itself being infructuous and devoid of merit.

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

6. It is apparent from the material on record that the applicant retired from Army service on 30/11/2019 on attaining the age of superannuation. He had rendered 32 years of service and was granted Service Pension for life. The duly constituted RMB assessed the disability of the applicant, "Osteo Arthritis Left Ankle" @20% for life and considered it as Aggravated by military service with disability qualifying for grant of 

disability pension for life, while all other disabilities as listed above were considered as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. However, the applicant has not been granted any disability element. Giving due credence to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court that the opinion of the medical board is sacrosanct and since the first disability of the applicant, "Osteoarthritis Left Ankle" was assessed @20% for life and it was considered as aggravated by military service by the RMB, we are of the considered opinion that the applicant is eligible for grant of disability element @20% alongwith rounding off benefits for life. Since the duly constituted Medical Board has considered all other disabilities from the Serial (b) to (g) at Para 3 above as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service and though these disabilities are assessed at composite 80% for life, but the net assessment qualifying for disability pension @20% for life, the prayer of the applicant for grant of disability element @80% and rounding it off from 80% to 100% has no merit and is rejected.


मन्यम् नयत

7. In fine, the OA is partly allowed and Respondents are directed to grant Disability Element to the applicant @20% duly rounded off to 50% wef 01/12/2019 for life. The arrears accruing thereof shall be paid to the applicant within a period of eight months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order, failing which, the applicant shall be entitled to receive interest @6% till the actual date of its payment.


8. The OA is disposed off accordingly. No order on costs.

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

यतो न्यायः ततो जयः

Sd/- XXX

Sd/- XXX

(SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J)

cda/-