Ex Sep Badal Singh (Army) vs UOI & Others on 6 October 2025

O R D E R

06.10.2025

MA No 240/2022

1. MA No 240/2022 been filed for condonation of delay in filing the OA. For the reasons stated in the Application and also the fact that pension is a recurring cause of action, MA No 240/2022 is allowed.

OA No 166/2022

2. By way of this Application under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has prayed for grant of Disability Element of Disability Pension along with Rounding Off Benefits wef 15.03.1997 and that the arrears be paid along with interest @ 18% per annum.

3. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the Applicant are that, the Applicant was enrolled in the Army on 24.09.1985. While in Service, the Applicant suffered from Disabilities, viz., (i) “Alcohol Abuse Deliberate Self Harm” and (ii) “Ununited Fracture of (Rt) Carpal Scapnoid”. He was placed in low medical category and, consequently, after rendering more than 11 years of service, he was invalided out of service on medical grounds on 14.03.1997. The duly constituted Invaliding Medical Board assessed his Composite Disability @ 20% for two years but the MA (P) at PCDA (P) arbitrarily assessed his disability @ 15-19% for five years from 16.01.1997 to 15.01.2002 and was not granted Disability Element of Disability Pension. Subsequent Re-Survey Medical Board held on 21.10.2004 opined that the disability was static since holding of Invaliding Medical Board, however, without any justifications, assessed his disability @ 15-19% for life wef 16.01.2002. The Applicant submits that he suffered from the disabilities due to strain and stress of military service and, hence, he is eligible for grant of Disability Element of Disability Pension. In support of his claim, the Applicant placed reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sukhvinder Singh Vs UOI & Ors, (2014) STPL 468 SC and UOI & Ors Vs Ram Avtar, (2014) SCC Online 1761 and submitted that he is eligible for grant of Disability Element of Disability Pension along with Rounding Off Benefits to 50% from the date of his discharge from Service. The Applicant made various representations as also issued Legal Notice for grant of Disability Pension, but to no avail. Therefore, the aggrieved Applicant has filed present OA.

4. The Respondents filed a detailed reply to the Application and while not disputing the basic facts presented by the Applicant, they have submitted that ID (i) ie., “Alcohol Abuse Deliberate Self Harm” was assessed @ 1-5% and was opined as Neither Attributable to Nor Aggravated by Military Service (NANA) and ID (ii), ie., “Ununited Fracture of (Rt) Carpal Scapnoid” was assessed @ 15-19% considered as Aggravated by Military Service and his Composite Disability was assessed @ 20% for two years. The MA (P) at PCDA (P) assessed his disability @ 15-19% for five years from 15.03.1997 to 15.01.2002. The Disability Pension claim of the Applicant was rejected by PCDA (P), the qualifying disability being below 20%. The subsequent RSMB assessed his disability @ 15-19% for life wef 16.01.2002. Since the disability qualifying for grant of Disability Pension was assessed below 20%, the Applicant is not eligible for grant of Disability Element of Disability Pension in terms of Rule 173 of Pension Regulations for the Army,

1961 (Part-1). The Respondents have placed reliance on Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Secy MoD Vs Damodaran AV, (2009) 9 SCC 140 and submitted that his disability qualifying for grant of Disability Pension was assessed @ 15-19% and being the expert medical body, its opinion has to be given due value, weight and credence. In view of the aforesaid averments, the Respondents have reiterated that the OA is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed.

5. We have heard Learned Counsels for both the parties and perused the material placed before us.

6. After going through the averments of the Learned Counsels and the material available on record, the following facts emerge :- (a) The Applicant was enrolled in Army on 24.09.1985 and after rendering more than 11 years of Service, he was Invalided Out from service on Medical Grounds on 14.03.1997 under Rule 13(3) III (iii) of Army Rules, 1954.

(b) Invaliding Medical Board assessed ID (i) “Alcohol Abuse Deliberate Self Harm” @ 1-5% and opined as NANA and ID (ii) “Ununited Fracture of (Rt) Carpal Scapnoid” @ 15-19% and opined as Attributable to Military Service and Composite Disability assessed @ 15-19% for two years with disability qualifying for Disability @ 15-19% for two years, however, PCDA (P) assessed the disability @ 15-19% for five years from 14.03.1997 to 15.01.2002.

(c) The Disability Pension claim of the Applicant was rejected by PCDA (P) and the same was communicated to the Applicant. The Applicant did not prefer any appeal in the prescribed time limit of six months.

(d) The OA has been filed on 10.05.2022 after an inordinate and inexplicable delay of more than 24 years.

7. The question on grant of Disability Pension to those personnel who have been invalided out with disability less than 20% has been settled by Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case of Sukhvinder Singh Vs UOI & Ors (Supra), the operative portion of which reads as under:- “9. We are of the persuasion, therefore, that firstly, any disability not recorded at the time of recruitment must be presumed to have been caused subsequently and unless proved to the contrary to be a consequence of military service. The benefit of doubt is rightly extended in favour of the member of the Armed Forces; any other conclusion would be tantamount to granting a premium to the Recruitment Medical Board for their own negligence. Secondly, the morale of the Armed Forces requires absolute and undiluted protection and if an injury leads to loss of service without any recompense, this morale would be severely undermined. Thirdly, there appears to be no provisions authorising the discharge or invaliding out of service where the disability is below twenty per cent and seems to us to be logically so. Fourthly, wherever a member of the Armed Forces is invalided out of service, it perforce has to be assumed that his disability was found to be above twenty per cent. Fifthly, as per the extant Rules/Regulations, a disability leading to invaliding out of service would attract the grant of fifty per cent disability pension.

8. On the issue of entitlement of arrears relating to old cases, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI & Ors Vs. Tarsem Singh, 2008(8) SCC 648, decreed as under:- “6. In this case, the delay of 16 years would affect the consequential claim for arrears. The High Court was not justified in directing payment of arrears relating to 16 years, and that too with interest. It ought to have restricted the relief relating to arrears to only three years before the date of writ petition, or from the date of demand to date of writ petition, whichever was lesser. It ought not to have granted interest on arrears in such circumstances.”

9. In the present case, the Applicant was Invalided Out from Service on Medical Grounds before fulfilling terms of engagement. He was denied Disability Element of Disability Pension on the grounds that his disability qualifying for grant of Disability Pension was assessed below 20%. The case is fully covered by Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Sukhvinder Singh (Supra) and the Applicant is entitled for grant of Disability Pension from the date of Invaliding Out from Service, duly Rounded Off to 50% wef 15.03.1997 for a period of five years. However, in the light of principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarsem Singh (Supra), the arrears of Disability Pension duly Rounded Off to 50% will be restricted to three years prior to the date of filing the OA, on 10.05.2022. As regards continuance of disability element beyond 15.01.2002, it has been seen that though the disability has been assessed @ 15-19%, the condition of the disability has been stated to be static. Since his medical condition has remained static and there has been no improvement, it is our considered opinion that Disability Element of Disability Pension be granted for life.

10. In-fine, the Respondents are directed to grant Disability Element of Disability Pension to the Applicant, along with Rounding Off Benefits of Disability Element of Disability Pension to 50% wef 10.05.2019, ie, three years prior to the date of filing the OA. The arrears shall be paid within six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order, failing which, the arrears shall carry interest at 6% per annum till the date of actual payment. Since the Applicant has already been granted Invalid Pension, suitable adjustment, if any, may be made before the arrears are released.

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

12. No order on costs.

(SANJIV MITTAL)

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

Ssy/-