Armed Forces Tribunal
Gurdip Singh vs Union of India on 22 October 2026
ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH CHANDIGARH
AT CHANDIMANDIR
-.-
MA 1126 of 2025 in OA 350 of 2023
Thursday, the 22nd day of Oct, 2026
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE LT GEN (DR) RANBIR SINGH, MEMBER (A)
Gurdip Singh
…… Applicant
(By Col Jasbir Singh (Retd), Advocate)
Versus
Union of India and others
…… Respondents
(By Sandeep Gupta, CGC, through VC)
-.-
ORDER
JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL, MEMBER (J),
The applicant was enrolled on 20.05.1980 and discharged on 31.05.2004 on completion of terms of engagement. He was in a Permanent Low Medical Category on account of disabilities of (a) ‘Primary Hypertension’, the extent of which was assessed to be 30% for two years but neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service and (b) ‘Obesity’, the extent of which was assessed to be nil% for life but neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. Since both the disabilities were assessed to be neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service, claim for grant of disability element was rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon an earlier Categorization Medical Board dated 30.09.2000 to submit that the said Medical Board had assessed the disability of ‘Primary Hypertension’ to have been aggravated by military service. The Release Medical Board was not justified in assessing the same differently without taking into consideration the said finding.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has not disputed the submission in law as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. His submission only is
Page 1 of 2
MA 1126 of 2025 in OA 350 of 2023
-2-
that the applicant was not entitled to disability element because he had not been invalided from service.
4. Even a soldier discharged in a Permanent Low Medical Category on account of a disability assessed to be attributable to/aggravated by military service, the extent of which is 20% or above is entitled to grant of disability element. Thus, the submission made by learned counsel for the respondents does not carry any weight.
5. By virtue of Regulation 422(h) of the Regulations for the Medical Services of the Armed Forces, 2010, a subsequent Medical Board is not bound by the finding of an earlier Medical Board, however, if its opinion is greatly divergent from the earlier view, the earlier finding must be considered. Such consideration is missing and thus, the finding of neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service cannot be sustained. It is, accordingly, quashed.
6. The applicant is held entitled to grant of disability element for the disability of ‘Primary Hypertension’ @ 30% rounded off to 50% w.e.f. 01.06.2004 for life. Corrigendum PPO be issued within 03 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order by learned counsel for the respondents/OIC Legal Cell. Arrears be also paid within the same period, failing which they shall become payable with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
(Lt Gen (Dr) Ranbir Singh)
(Justice Sudhir Mittal) Member (A)
Member (J)
22nd Oct, 2026 AKB REPORTABLE OR NOT
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…