Ex Gnr Hanumana Ram Jat vs UOI & Others on 29 January 2026

O R D E R

29.01.2026

1. By way of this Application under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has prayed for directing the Respondents to grant Disability Pension from the date of his discharge from service along with Rounding Off benefits wef 01.01.1996 and that the arrears be paid along with interest @ 18% per annum and cost of litigation. Further, the Respondents may be directed to call the Applicant for Re-Assessment Medical Board.

2. Perusal of records reveals that the Applicant was invalided out of service on medical grounds due to Disability “Neurosis (Conversion Reaction)” after rendering 6 years and 11 months of service. The duly constituted Invaliding Medical Board assessed the disability @ 30% for two years and considered it as Aggravated by Military Service. The case was processed with PCDA (P) for grant of Disability Pension.However, the MA (P) at PCDA (P) considered the disability as Neither Attributable to Nor Aggravated by Military Service (NANA) and rejected Disability Pension Claim of the Applicant and, accordingly, the Applicant was granted Invalid Gratuity instead of Disability Pension. 1st Appeal preferred by the Applicant against rejection of Disability Pension was also rejected by the Competent Authority. In the light of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Secy MoD & Ors Vs Damodaran AV (dead) through LRs & Ors, reported in (2009) 9 SCC 140 (2009) 9 SCC 140, which held that the opinion given by the medical board shall be given weightage and primacy in the manner for ascertainment as to whether or not the injuries/illness sustained was due to or was aggravated by the military service which contributed to invalidation from the military service being an expert medical body. In the present case, the disability of the Applicant was arbitrarily considered as NANA without giving any specific reasons and without physically and medically examining the Applicant by MA (P) at PCDA (P).

3. During the course of arguments, Learned Counsel for the Respondents placed on record copies of AG’s Branch, AG/PS-4(B) letter No 39022/24/AG/PS- 4(B) dt 09.06.2025, Directorate General of Artillery (Arty-10) letter No A/10150/Legal/Policy/Arty-10B dt 16.06.2025 and Artillery Records letter No 1693/LC/11/NE-5(C) dt 04.07.2025 and submitted that some cases have been shortlisted wherein the cases have been processed for filing of Writ Petition before Hon’ble High Courts and the same are being re-examined for suo-moto acceptance by the Competent Authority for issue of Govt sanctions/directions. In the present case, the Applicant’s disability was considered as Aggravated by Military Service but the same was altered by MA (P) at PCDA (P). Therefore, the present case falls under Appendix B of Artillery Records letter dt 04.07.2025.

4. In view of the fact that the Govt is considering the suo-motu acceptance of similar cases, we remand the case back to the Respondents with directions to consider the case of the Applicant afresh in the light of principles of aforementioned letters within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. The outcome thereof shall be intimated to the Applicant.

5. The OA is disposed off accordingly. Pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, also stand disposed off.

6. No order on costs.

7. Copy of the Order be given “Dasti” to the Learned Counsel for the Respondents.

(SANJIV MITTAL)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

Ssy/-