Army Personnel Not Entitled To Disability Pension If Injury Is Not Attributable To Military Service : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that a military personnel is not eligible for disability pension if there is not even a causal connection between the Military service and injuries.

Unless the disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service and is more than 20%, the entitlement to disability pension does not arise, the bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and MM Sundresh observed.

Background

On 6th November 1999, the army officer was granted annual leave. He proceeded to Kishanpura on the same day. While on leave, on 8th November 1999, he suffered an accident. While crossing the road, he was hit by a speedy scooter. As a result of the accident, he sustained head injury and became unconscious. The Medical Board assessed the percentage of his disability at 80%. The Medical Board placed him in low medical category (EEE). On that ground, he was invalidated out of service from 28th September 2000. He made an application to the Armed Forces Tribunal praying for grant of disability pension. The Tribunal directed to release the disability pension quantified at 80% disability for life to  from the date of his discharge from military service. To hold thus, the Tribunal relied on its earlier judgment (Ex. NK. Raj Pal v. Union of India) in which it had held that if an individual sustains an injury during the period of any kind of authorized leave and his act was not inconsistent with Military service, his disability is deemed to be attributable to Military service.

In appeal, the Union of India contended that there has to be a reasonable connection between the injuries sustained by a member of Armed Forces resulting in disability and the Military service. Reference was made to Regulation 173 of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 and Rule 12 of the Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982. It was submitted that the accident occurred couple of days after the personnel travelled from the place of his duty to leave station and thus was disentitled to disability pension. The Centre relied on the judgment in Union of India & Ors. v. Vijay Kumar No.3989606 P, Ex­ Naik 2015 (10) SCC 460.

There has to be a reasonable causal connection

The court noted that, in the present case, the accident did not occur when he was travelling to leave station but only after he reached the leave station. Unless the disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service and is more than 20%, the entitlement to disability pension does not arise, the bench observed.

The bench further noted that in Vijay Kumar, it was specifically observed that there has to be a reasonable causal connection between the injuries resulting in disability and the military service. Allowing the appeal, the bench observed:

"What is held above, is the binding precedent. In the present case, as noted earlier, two days after the respondent reached the leave station, he met with an accident on a public road. There is absolutely no nexus between the Military service and injuries sustained by the respondent. There is not even a causal connection. The Tribunal has completely overlooked this aspect which goes to the root of the matter. Hence, the respondent was not entitled to the disability pension"

Case details : Union of India vs Ex Naik Ram Singh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 611 | CA 9654 OF 2014 | 18 July 2022 | Justices Abhay S Oka and MM Sundresh

Headnotes

Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 ; Regulation 173 - Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982 ; Rule 12 - Unless the disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service and is more than 20%, the entitlement to disability pension does not arise - There has to be a reasonable causal connection between the injuries resulting in disability and the military service - Referred to Union of India & Ors. v. Vijay Kumar No.3989606 P, Ex­ Naik 2015 (10) SCC 460. (Para 8-10)

Click here to Read/Download Judgment