SC rejects 271 Govt appeals on disability pension

Slamming the Defence Ministry, the Supreme Court dismissed a batch of around 271 appeals and special leave petitions filed by the Union Government in cases concerning the grant of the disability element of service pension to several retired army officers. A Bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe passed the ruling on Tuesday (93-page order uploaded on Wednesday) on challenges by the Government to orders of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) and High Courts granting relief to several retired army personnel who sought disability pension.

“The sad part of this litigation is that, out of around 271 civil appeals and special leave petitions, most of them are barred by limitation. Many similar appeals that were barred by limitation have already been dismissed in the past; the present batch is only a small number that survive. Moreover, it is significant to note that the number of appeals rejected at the first appellate stage, after a dismissal by the RMB, far exceeds those accepted. As per information obtained under the Right to Information Act, 2005, of the 2,997 appeals before the First Appellate Authority, almost 2,855 of the claims were rejected and only 142 appeals are accepted. Before the Second Appellate Authority, out of 456 appeals, 439 were rejected and only 17 appeals are accepted,” the Court said.

In this regard, the Court further referred to the 2015 Raksha Mantri Committee of Experts report, which had recommended withdrawal of appeals of this nature pending against disabled soldiers. It noted that the recommendation had “not been faithfully implemented.”

“Appeals such as these are filed and continue to be filed, even after the Ministry of Defence accepted the Committee's recommendation for withdrawal of this class of litigation,” said the judgment. The retired officers had approached the AFT/ High Courts after Release Medical Boards (RMBs) of the army classified their disabilities as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service (NANA).

This classification meant that the army was held not liable to pay the retired personnel disability pension, since the disability was neither caused nor worsened by their military service. After the AFT and High Courts overturned such classifications and granted the retired officers relief, the Defence Ministry challenged such rulings before the Supreme Court.

By its September 15 ruling, the Court acknowledged that the Entitlement Rules of 2008 removed an earlier presumption that a person is physically fit when he joins military service. However, the Court ruled that this presumption would automatically mean that a disability detected when such an officer leaves the army is unconnected to military service.

The apex court also stressed that the findings of Medical Boards in such matters cannot be brushed aside. It said tribunals dealing with pending claims must closely examine the Board's opinion and the reasons for its findings before deciding whether disability pension should be granted.

In the present batch of appeals, however, the Court found no ground to interfere with the orders under challenge and dismissed the Union's appeals on grounds of both delay and merits. The Court also expressed concern over continued litigation in such cases. Attorney General R Venkataramani appeared for the Union Government.

Advocates Sudhanshu Pandey, MV Mukunda, Brig Shrivastava, US Maurya, Col. Naresh Ghai, Siddharth Agarwal, Girish Kumar, Ajit Kakkar, Praveen Kumar, Aditya Puar, Col IS Singh, Baldev Singh, Maheravesh Rein, Vivekbhai Patel and Kanti appeared for the respondents/ex-servicemen.