Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Deputy Director General(Pensions) of office of DGAFMS.
Deputy Financial Adviser (Pensions)."
From a reading of Regulation 173, it is clearly evident that with a view to claiming disability pension, which consists of service element and disability element, invalidation or boarding out of service of the individual on account of disability, which is attributable to or aggravated by military service in non-battle casualty is sine qua non. Additionally, the disability as assessed by the medical authorities must be 20% or above. The question whether disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service is required to be determined under the Rules in Appendix II i.e. 1982 Entitlement Rules. Regulation 173-A would, however, apply to an individual who is placed in lower medical category other than "E" permanently and is discharged because no alternative employment in his trade or category suitable to his medical category could be provided by the army or who is unwilling to accept alternative employment or who having accepted the alternative appointment is discharged before completion of his engagement. Such army personnel shall be deemed to have been invalided from service for the purpose of his entitlement to disability pension in terms 1982, Entitlement Rules. The note appended, however, prescribes that an individual, who is placed in low medical category while on extended WP(C) No.3173/2023 along with connected matters service and is discharged on that account before completion of his period of extension shall also be covered by Regulation 173-A. Now let us revert to the 1982, Entitlement Rules. Rule-4 of 1982 Entitlement Rules is a provision which is akin to Regulation 173 and provides that invalidation from service is a condition precedent for grant of disability pension. It lays down that an individual, who, at the time of his release, is in a lower medical category than in which he was recruited, shall also be deemed to have been invalided out of service. Rule 5 underscores some presumptions in favour of the individual claiming disability pension. It prescribes that a member of the Force shall be presumed to have been in sound physical and mental condition upon entering service and any subsequent deterioration in his health leading to his discharge from service on medical grounds shall be deemed to have taken place due to army service. 
                 (b)       Assessment:


                 (i)     The assessment with regard to percentage of disability in both
injury and disease cases as recommended by the Invaliding/Release Medical Board as approved by the next higher medical authority shall be treated as final and for life unless the individual himself requests for a review, except in the cases of disability/disabilities which are not of a permanent nature.

Bijender Singh v. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 895. In the aforementioned case, the appellant was enrolled in the army on 30.09.1985 and was invalided out of service w.e.f. 14.08.1989 on account of low medical category for the disease 'generalized tonic clonic seizure old 345 V-67' assessed at less than 20% on the recommendations of the Invaliding Medical Board. The Invaliding Medical Board as well as Re-Survey Medical Board observed that the disability was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. Hon'ble Supreme Court once again placed strong reliance upon its earlier judgments rendered in Dharamvir Singh (supra) and Rajbir Singh (supra) and in paragraph No.45.1 held thus:-

"21. Though, the opinion of the Medical Board is subject to judicial 14 review but the Courts are not possessed of expertise to dispute such report unless there is strong medical evidence on record to dispute the opinion of the Medical Board which may warrant the constitution of the Review Medical Board. The invaliding Medical Board has categorically held that the appellant is not fit for further service and there is no material on record to doubt the correctness of the Report of the invaliding Medical Board."