Rajesh Kumar Singh vs Union Of India And Others

M.A. No. 1398 of 2017

For the reasons carved out in the Application the delay of 31 days in filing the Original Application is condoned. MA No. stands disposed off.

OA. 1858 OF 2017

The applicant, Gp. Capt. Rajesh Kumar Singh (Retd.), is seeking the following reliefs:

(a) Call for the entire records including RMB and all Medical proceedings records based on which the Applicant's disability has been declared neither

attributable nor aggravated by military service and quash all such orders not considering his disability attributable to military service including order

dated 03.02.2017 and rejecting his claim of disability pension.

(b) Direct the Respondents to grant him disability pension with effect from the date of release i.e. from 30.11.2016 @50 percent and further

broadband it to 755 in the light of the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme in C. A. 418 of 2012.

(c) Issue such other order/direction as may be deemed appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2 Briefly stated facts of the case are that the applicant was commissioned in the Indian Air Force on 06.12.1986 and prematurely retired on

30.11.2016 in Low Medical Category. At the time of retirement from service, the Release Medical Board (RMB) held at AF Station, New Delhi on

10.11.2016 assessed his disability 'CAD-SVD-LAD (PTCA (OLD), (ICD NO. I-25.2, Z-09.0)' @ 30% for life and opined the disability to be neither

attributable to nor aggravated (NANA) by service as the onset of disease is in peace Area. The applicant was informed by the respondents about the

rejection of his claim for disability pension vide their letters dated 03.02.2017. It is in this perspective that the applicant has preferred the present

Original Application challenging the rejection letter.

Learned Counsel for the applicant pleaded that at the time of commission, the applicant was found mentally and physically fit for service in the Air

Force and there is no note in the service documents that he was suffering from any disease at the time of commission in Air Force. The disease of the

applicant was contracted during the service, hence it is attributable to and aggravated by Military Service. He pleaded that various Benches of Armed

Forces Tribunal have granted disability pension in similar cases, as such the applicant be granted disability pension as well as arrears thereof, as such

the applicant is entitled to disability pension and its rounding off to 50%.

We have heard Ld. Counsel for the applicant as also Ld. Counsel for the respondents. We have also gone through the Release Medical Board

proceedings as well as the records. The only question which needs to be answered by us is straight and simple i.e. whether the disability of the

applicant is attributable to or aggravated by Military Service?

The law on attributability of a disability has already been settled by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Dharamvir Singh Versus Union of

India & Others, reported in (2013) 7 Supreme Court Cases 316. In this case the Apex Court took note of the provisions of the Pensions Regulations,

Entitlement Rules and the General Rules of Guidance to Medical Officers to sum up the legal position emerging from the same.

In view of the settled position of law on attributability, we find that the RMB has denied attributability to the applicant only by endorsing that the

disability 'CAD-SVD-LAD (PTCA (OLD), (ICD NO. I-25.2, Z-09.0)' has originated while posted in a peace station only has no close time

association with stress/strain of Field/HAA/CIOPs service. This reasoning of RMB is not convincing and does not reflect the complete truth on this

matter. The applicant was commissioned in Indian Air Force on 06.12.1986 and the disability has started after more than thirteen years of Air Force

service. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the reasons given in RMB for declaring disease as NANA is very brief and cryptic in nature

and does not adequately explain the denial of attributability. Additionally we are of the opinion that it is not correct to say that stress and strain of

military service is limited to Field/HAA/CI Ops Area only. Stress and strain are intrinsic to military service, hence, they are present in peace Areas

also. Therefore, benefit of doubt in these circumstances should be extended in favour of the applicant. Thus in view of the law settled by Dharamvir

Singh vs Union of India & Ors (supra),we consider the disability of the applicant as aggravated by military service, as such the applicant is entitled for

disability element from the date of his discharge.

In view of the above, the Original Application No. 1858 of 2017 deserves to be allowed, hence allowed. The impugned order dated 03.02.2017,

enclosed as Annexure A-1 is set aside. The disability of the applicant i.e. 'CAD-SVD-LAD (PTCA (OLD), (ICD NO. 1-25.2, Z-09.0)' is to be

considered as aggravated by military service. The respondents are directed to grant disability element to the applicant ©30% for life which would

stand rounded off to 50% for life from the date of discharge of the applicant i.e. 01.12.2016. The respondents are directed to give effect to this order

within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Default will invite interest @6% per annum till actual

payment.

No order as to costs.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

Pronounced in the open court on 6 March, 2020.