Balbir Singh vs Union Of India And Others

Aggrieved by the order of the respondents vide DSC Records letter dated 16.09.20006 denying him disability element of pension for disease

'Narrow Angle Glaucoma Both Eyes' (degree of disability 30% for life) on the ground that the RMB dated 23.10.2001 had assessed the disability as

neither attributable nor aggravated (NANA) by military service, the applicant, a Naik who retired on 28.02.2002 after pensionable service in the

Defence Security Corps (DSC), has filed this OA seeking that his disability be treated as attributed/aggravated by service and grant him disability

element of pension accordingly.

Heard the learned counsels on both sides and perused the pleadings and documents on record.

Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially enrolled in the Indian Army (Infantry-GUARDS) on 02.5.1970 and was prematurely

discharged from service on extreme compassionate grounds on 03.09.1973. Thereafter, he was re-enrolled in the DSC on 26.02.1977 and was

prematurely discharged, at his own request, on 28.02.2002 in the rank of Naik. In the meanwhile, the applicant had contracted disease, 'Narrow Angle

Glaucoma Both Eyes' for which he had been downgraded to low medical category E 3 (Permanent) with effect from 02.03.1999. Release Medical

Board (RMB) conducted at INHS Sanjivani prior to his discharge assessed the degree of his medical disability. 'Narrow Angle Glaucoma Both Eyes'

as 300/o for life, but stated that, being a 'constitutional disease; it was neither attributable nor aggravated by military service. Hence this OA.

Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the reason that the disability pension was denied was on the ground of the applicant having

sought premature discharge at his own request. As this reason for denial has already been set aside through a Catena of judgments of various

Tribunals and courts, the impugned order dated 16.09.2006 of the respondents deserved to be quashed and, accordingly, disability pension be granted

to the applicant. Reliance is also placed on the judgment dated 02.07.2013 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Dharamvir Singh vs. Union

of India & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.4949 of 2013) whereby it was ordered that if an individual is found to be medically fit by the Medical Board at the

time of his enrolment into service, any disability that he contracted during the course of his service should be considered as attributable/aggravated.

Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, has refuted the arguments made on behalf of the applicant. At the outset, the respondents

have objected to the OA on the grounds of limitation in that it has been filed after an inordinate delay of 14 years from the date of his discharge from

DSC service and 10 years after issue of the impugned Speaking Order. Further, Para 4 of the impugned letter of 16.09.2006, where it is clearly stated

that the primary reason for rejection of claim for disability pension was the fact that the RMB had assessed that the disability 'Narrow Angle

Glaucoma' is a constitutional disease and thus attributability/aggravation cannot be granted. Para 4 is reproduced as hereunder:-

The records reveal that you were brought before Release Medical Board on 23 October 2001 at INS Venduruthy to a!--ess your medical

condition before transfer to pension establishment 017 compassionate grounds, as applied by you. The Release Medical Board diagnosed

you as a case of 'NARROW ANGLE GLAUCOMA BOTH EYE V-67 (365)' and assessed the degree of disablement at 30% life long and

permanent which as per the medical board is constitutional in nature, is neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service and also

is not connected with the service. The grant of disability pension is governed by Regulation 173 of Pension Regulations for the Army PAT-I

(1961), as per which disability pension may be granted to an individual who is invalidea' out of service on account of a disability which is

attributable to or aggravated by military service in non-battle casualty and is assessed at 20% or over. Since your disability was neither

attributable to nor aggravated by Military service as per medical board and also since you were not invalided out of service, but were

transferred to pension establishment at your own request, you are not eligible for grant of disability pension under the said Regulation 173.

The Government of India, Ministry of Defence letter No.1 (2)/97/D(Pen-C) dated 31 January 2001 also stipulates that:- ""an individual who

retires voluntarily or seek discharge on request shall not be eligible for any award on account of disability"" Thus it is seen that your case

fails to fulfill the conditions for grant of disability pension as stipulated in Regulation 173 of the Pension Regulations Part I (1961).

Hence, as the disease is a constitutional disease with genetic causes, the Medical Board correctly assessed the disability as NANA. Hence, the claim

of the applicant deserves to be rejected.

Consideration:

We have given careful consideration to the arguments on both sides and find that the primary issue before us is whether or not the Release Medical

Board had correctly assessed that the applicant's medical disability 'Narrow Angle Glaucoma' is neither attributable nor aggravated by military service.

The primary reason that the respondents have cited for non-grant of disability element of pension to the applicant is that the RMB had assessed that

the disease, being 'constitutional' in nature, is neither attributable nor aggravated by military service.

Para 35 of the Guide to Medical Officers (Military Pension) 2008 is relevant to the case and is reproduced as hereunder:-

Glaucoma.(3) Primary Glaucoma, May be either acute or chronic. Its onset is generally speaking unaffected by service conditions; but

exceptionally, an acute attack may be brought on by worry, fatigue, or illness and, if any of these were considered to be the result of service,

aggravation might have to be conceded. The onset may be insidious and it may reveal its presence for the first time as an acutely painful eye, but in

the absence of evidence of undue mental or physical stress occasioned by war service, it can not be considered that this disease is attributable to or

has been aggravated by service factors.

(b) Secondary Glaucoma. This may be due to a service trauma and would be attributable. It may be caused by iritis and Mira-ocular haemorrhage,

and entitlement would, therefore, have to be considered in relation to the underlying cause. It may also be the result of an thtraocular tumour. In

general terms it may be said that, in the great majority of cases there is a disturbance of the intraocular circulation to which is frequently added an

obstruction to the circulation of the intra -ocular fluids. The factor common to all cases is the increase of intra -ocular pressure. In such cases;

therefore, the primary condition which is responsible, for these changes or sequelae must be considered in relation to entitlement and not the glaucoma

per se.

Narrow Angle Glaucoma, being a form of primary glaucoma, is stated to be unaffected by service conditions and, thus, has not been assessed by the

Medical Board as being attributable/aggravated by military service. We also find that the applicant has not submitted any evidence to substantiate the

existence of any service related stress or trauma which could have supported his claim for attributability for his disease. Thus, the disease being

constitutional, and the applicant not having provided any evidence of trauma which may have resulted in contraction of the disease, we have no reason

to set aside the opinion of the Medical Board.

In the result, the OA lacks merit and is rejected.

No order as to costs.,

Pronounced in open court on the 2nd day of March, 2020.