Lt Col Avinash Lalaniya (Retd) vs UOI & Others on 25 February 2026

O R D E R

25.02.2026

1. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has field this OA praying for directing the Respondents to grant disability element @40% alongwith its rounding off benefits to 50% wef 18/8/2021 for life to the applicant, alongwith interest @8% per annum.

2. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the applicant are that the applicant was commissioned in the Indian Army as an Infantry Officer on 07/6/2008 and was eventually invalided out from service wef 17/8/2021. The applicant suffered the disability, “Moderate Depressive Episode” while serving at Sikkim (North East) and the same was considered as attributable to military service and was assessed @40% for life. However, case of the applicant for grant of disability pension was turned down by the audit authorities without jurisdiction and against the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sapper Mohinder Singh, Civil Appeal No 164 of 1993, Annexure A/3. Applicant further submits that he has suffered the disability while he was serving at High Altitude Area and the disability was considered as attributable to military service due to stress and strain of military service vide Para 54 (a) of Chapter VI of GMO and, hence, he is eligible for grant of disability pension. However, despite this, the applicant was not disability pension. First Appeal against the rejection of his disability pension claim was also rejected by the Respondents. Having been aggrieved, the applicant has filed this OA praying for relief.

3. The Respondents, vide their Reply Statement, has submitted that the applicant was commissioned into the Indian Army on 07/6/2008 as an Infantry Officer through direct commission. He was Invalided out from service on 17/8/2021 due to medical concerns specifically relating to his diagnosis, “Moderate Depressive Episode” after serving approximately for 13 years. The IMB found the disability of the applicant attributable to military service. However, upon subsequent review, the claim of the applicant was denied. Both the first and second appeals of the applicant were rejected by the competent authority. Respondents further submit that in terms of Para 54 (a), Chapter VI of GMO Handbook, 2008, stipulates that the disabilities manifest in operational capacities, particularly during counter insurgency operations or in high altitude environments, may be adjudged as attributable to military service, provided they are supported by thorough medical evaluations that establish causation. The guidelines assert that mental health issues arising under such service conditions warrant consideration, subject to the need for firm evidentiary substantiation. Further, in terms of Para 81 (b) of Pension Regulations for the Army 2008, determination of whether a disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service align with the documented evidences, emphasizing the essential need for clarity in any claim brought forward. Para 82 of ibid Pension Regulations further emphasizes that the disabilities deemed as resulting from military service shall be reviewed comprehensively, but discretionary authority remains with the medical boards. This discretion ought to be exercised judiciously, in accordance with established medical and procedural norms. Under the circumstances, the applicant is not eligible for grant of relief as prayed for.

4. During the course of hearing, counsel for the applicant has placed on record a copy of the Order dated 03/9/2025 passed by this Tribunal in OA No 470/2022 in the case of IC-59529X Lt Col Abhishek Mishra (Retd) Vs UOI &Ors and submitted that the case of the applicant herein is also the same as that of the applicant in the ibid Order and, hence, eligible for grant of disability pension as prayed for in the OA.

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

6. It is apparent from the material on record that the applicant was invalided out from service wef 17/8/2021 due to the disability, “Moderate Depressive Episode”. He had rendered 13 years of service. The duly constituted IMB assessed the disability of the applicant @40% for life and considered it as attributable to military service. As per copy of IMB proceedings, it has been stated that the onset of disability of the applicant was in Field Area/CI Ops and, hence, attributable to military service due to stress and strain of military service vide Para 54 (a) of Chapter VI of GMO, 2008. Vide letter dated 19/7/2022, initial claim of the applicant was rejected by the competent authority at IHQ of MoD (Army) on the ground that the disability of the applicant does not fulfil the eligibility conditions as laid down in existing rules/provision for grant of disability element and, hence, the claim was not approved. Subsequent Appeals filed by the applicant against rejection of his claim were also rejected by the competent authority at IHQ of MoD (Army). As per copy of PPO dated 27/9/2022, annexed at Annexure A/8, the applicant has been granted Invalid Pension wef 18/8/2021 for life.

7. This Tribunal has consistently held the view that the opinion of the Medical Boards is supreme and sacrosanct and needs to be given due weightage and credence to its opinion and, therefore, the Competent Authority at IHQ of MoD (Army) is not justified in over-ruling the opinion of the medical board and rejecting the claim of the applicant mechanically without subjecting the applicant for a fresh medical board. On the issue of primacy of opinion of medical boards, Hon’ble Apex Court vide its Judgment dated 20/8/2009 in the case of Secretary MoD&Ors Vs AV

Damodaran(Dead) & LRs &Ors (2009)9 SCC 140, (Civil Appeal No 5678 of 2009 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No 23727 of 2008), held as under :- “8. When an individual is found suffering from any disease or has sustained injury, he is examined by the medical experts who would not only examine him but also ascertain the nature of disease/injury and also record a decision as to whether the said personnel is to be placed in a medical category which is lower than `AYE' (fit category) and whether temporarily or permanently. They also give a medical assessment and advice as to whether the individual is to be brought before the release/invalidating medical board. The said release/invaliding medical board generally consists of three doctors and they, keeping in view the clinical profile, the date and place of onset of invaliding disease/disability and service conditions, draws a conclusion as to whether the disease/injury has a causal connection with military service or not. On the basis of the same they recommend (a) attributability, or (b) aggravation, or (c) whether connection with service. The second aspect which is also examined is the extent to which the functional capacity of the individual is impaired. The same is adjudged and an assessment is made of the percentage of the disability suffered by the said personnel which is recorded so that the case of the personnel could be considered for grant of disability element of pension. Another aspect which is taken notice of at this stage is the duration for which the disability is likely to continue. The same is assessed/recommended in view of the disease being capable of being improved. All the aforesaid aspects are recorded and recommended in the form of AFMSF- 16. The Invalidating Medical Board forms its opinion/recommendation on the basis of the medical report, injury report, court of enquiry proceedings, if any, charter of duties relating to peace or field area and of course, the physical examination of the individual.

9. The aforesaid provisions came to be interpreted by the various decisions rendered by this Court in which it has been consistently held that the opinion given by the doctors or the medical board shall be given weightage and primacy in the matter 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”.

8. During the course of final hearing, Counsel for the Respondents, while conceding that the onset of the disability of the applicant occurred while the applicant was posted at a Field Area and the same was considered as attributable to military service due to stress and strain of military service, but the Competent Authority at the Army HQ had not approved the eligibility of the claim of the applicant as it does not fulfil the conditions laid down in existing rules/provisions.

9. Thus, it is apparent that the applicant suffered the disability, “Moderate Depressive Episode”, while he was posted at Field Area (CI Ops) and the disability was considered as attributable to military service due to stress and strain of military service by the duly constituted IMB. Therefore, the applicant is eligible for grant of Disability Pension wef the date of his invalidment for life, instead of Invalid Pension which he is in receipt of at present.

10. In-fine, the OA is allowed and the Respondents are directed to grant Disability Pension @40% alongwith rounding off of Disability Element of Disability Pension to 50% wef 18/8/2021 for life to the Applicant. 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% per annum till the date of payment of arrears. Invalid Pension paid to the applicant shall be adjusted from such arrears.

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

(SANJIV MITTAL)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

cda/-