Hypertension Cannot Be Reason To Deny Disability Pension To Military Personnel, Says Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court, in a recent case pertaining to a retired armed forces personnel, emphasised that disability pension cannot be denied to a retiree based on vague medical reports. It highlighted that disability needs have to be determined based on the proper records. If a soldier was found fit at the time of joining the service, any subsequent disability developed later is to be presumed to be linked to the military tenure, unless it is proved otherwise, the court said. 

In its ruling, the court dismissed the petition filed by the Union of India, seeking rejection of the grant of disability pension to retired Indian Air Force (IAF) personnel Tejpal Singh. The bench comprising Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora also raised points on the accountability of medical boards for providing authentic and complete information.

Case Brief

Singh had joined the IAF in 1981 and retired in March 2019 after a 37-year service. He was found to be in sound physical and mental health with no disabilities at the time of joining. However, by the time he retired, he was found to be suffering from Primary Hypertension and another condition with a composite 50 per cent disability for life. 

Yet, the Release Medical Board (RMB) didn’t attribute the change to the military service and rather labelled it as ‘idiopathic/lifestyle related disorder’.

When the denial was challenged at the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), the Tribunal awarded him the disability pension on August 3, 2023. But then, the Union of India filed a petition with the Delhi High Court to set aside the Tribunal’s order.

Arguments

The Union of India’s counsel argued that the Tribunal should not have allowed the pension because the respondent suffered the disability in a Peace Area. The counsel said that the medical board’s findings were final and that ‘Hypertension’ is a lifestyle-related ailment, and not the result of military service. The counsel further argued that the Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards to Armed Forces Personnel, 2008, suggested that an officer who is suffering from a disease at the time of retirement is ordinarily entitled to the disability pension.

Overall, the contention was around whether the military department had successfully discharged its accountability to prove that the ailment was not related to the service conditions.

Court Observation

The court referred to Supreme Court judgments in earlier related cases. It noted that the respondent (Singh) was appointed in IAF on October 28, 1981, and discharged from service on March 31, 2019.

“It is a conceded case that he did not suffer from any disability at the time of appointment in the Indian Air Force,” the court said.

Court Judgment

The court found the petition without any merit and dismissed it. It upheld the AFT’s order, reinforcing that the retiree (Tejpal Singh) was entitled to the disability pension, in line with the Supreme Court’s earlier order, according to which, all pension arrears are to be paid within three months or, if not, at 6 per cent interest per annum to be paid on the delayed payment of arrears.