Delhi HC rules in favour of disability pension for soldiers, says ‘such denial is unacceptable'

Hindustan Times

2 days ago

Disability pension for armed forces personnel cannot be denied solely because the disability occurred while they were posted in a peace station, the Delhi high court has ruled, while emphasising that such denial is unacceptable as it 'not only undermines their service towards the nation, but also fails to acknowledge the effect of their demanding careers'. Representational image.
A bench of justices Navin Chawla and Renu Bhatnagar, in a judgment on Wednesday, noted that the demanding nature of military life at peace stations, even in the absence of active conflict or challenges of hard area postings, can significantly impact the overall well-being of personnel and result in hypertension.
'Disability pension cannot be denied solely on the ground that the onset of the disability occurred while the personnel were posted at peace stations. It is disheartening that members of our armed forces are being denied disability pension solely on the aforementioned ground. This overlooks the continuous physical and mental stress faced by soldiers, regardless of their location,' the bench ruled in a verdict delivered on Tuesday.
The 85-page ruling came in response to a batch of approximately 300 pleas filed by the Centre challenging the Armed Forces Tribunal's order holding them eligible for grant of disability pension on account of primary hypertension, ischaemic heart disease (IHD).
In its petition, the Centre represented by Attorney General R Venkataramani asserted that none of the soldiers was eligible to be considered for disability pension since the review medical board had opined that the disease was noticed in a non field (peace) station and could thus neither be attributed to or aggravated by military service.
The soldiers asserted that the medical board had failed to assign any specific or cogent reason for not considering the disability/disease as attributable to or aggravated by service. It was also argued that peace stations have their own constraints and disability is a cumulative effect of prolonged service related stress.
In its ruling, the court also held that disability pension is not an act of generosity but a soldier's rightful acknowledgement of the sacrifice endured and is a measure upholding state's responsibility towards the soldiers.
'Disability pension is not an act of generosity, but a rightful and just acknowledgement of the sacrifices endured by them, which manifest in the form of disabilities/disorders suffered during the course of their military service. It is a measure that upholds the State's responsibility towards its soldiers, who have served the nation with courage and devotion,' the court maintained.
Laying emphasis on the harsh and inhuman weather and conditions in which the armed forces personnel defend the nation, the bench held that it was the bounden duty of medical boards to assign well reasoned justification before concluding that the disability suffered cannot be said attributed to or aggravated by service conditions.
'It must always be kept in view that the Armed Forces personnel, in defending this great nation from external threats, have to perform their duties in the most harsh and inhuman weather and conditions, be it on far-flung corner of land, in terrains and atmosphere where limits of man's survival are tested, or in air or water, where again surviving each day is a challenge, away from the luxury of family life and comforts. It is, therefore, incumbent upon the RMB to furnish cogent and well-reasoned justification for their conclusions that the disease/disability suffered by the personnel cannot be said to be attributable to or aggravated by such service conditions,' the judgement emphasised.
The high court ultimately dismissed the petitions, noting that the RMB failed to take note of their medical record, family history or identify the cause of disease, prior to arriving at the conclusion.