Rajumon T.M. vs. Union Of India

2025 INSC 644
R E P O R T A B L E

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


CIVIL APPEAL No.998 OF 2025
(@ DIARY NO. 20836 OF 2022)


RAJUMON T.M. …APPELLANT (S)

VERSUS


UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …RESPONDENT(S)



J U D G M E N T

NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH, J.


The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and
final order dated 17.01.2013 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional
Bench, Kochi in OA No.100 of 2011 by which the claim of the appellant for
grant of disabilities pension was denied to the appellant.
2. Only the relevant facts in brief for the purpose of deciding this appeal
may be adverted to.
3. The appellant, Rajumon T.M. No.13978552W was enrolled in the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
ARJUN BISHT
Date: 2025.05.08
11:33:01 IST
Reason:
Indian Army on 17.11.1988 as a sepoy and after serving more than 9 (nine)
Page 1 of 31



years he was discharged from service on being diagnosed with Schizophrenia.
His discharge on medical invalidation was based on the opinion of the
Invalidating Medical Board held on 30 March, 1998 at the Command
Hospital, Western Command, Chandimandir which found that the onset of the
invalidating disease was in August 1993 during which period the appellant
had served in a peace station and that the disability was neither attributable to
nor aggravated by military service and the said disease of the appellant was
constitutional in nature and not connected with the service. The disability was
assessed at 30 percent for two years. Accordingly, the appellant’s claim for
disability pension was rejected by the CCDA (Pension), Allahabad vide letter
dated 04.01.1999 which was communicated to the appellant by the AMC
Records vide letter dated 15.01.1999.
4. The said rejection was challenged before the first appellate committee
which was dismissed. The appellant, thereafter, made an unsuccessful attempt
for redressal of his grievances through a Member of the Parliament. The
appellant was informed by the Ministry of Defence vide communication dated
07.11.2009 that the matter had already been considered and his appeal against
rejection of disability pension claim was turned down earlier by the competent
authority. He was also informed that he had not preferred the second appeal
after his first appeal was dismissed.
Page 2 of 31



5. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his claim for disability pension, the
appellant unsuccessfully approached the Armed Forces Tribunal, Original
Bench at Kochi in OA No.100 of 2011 which was heard with other applicants
seeking similar reliefs.
6. Before the Armed Forces Tribunal it was pleaded by the appellant that
he had been found medically fit at the time of enrolment and nothing adverse
was noted at that point of time and the appellant became afflicted with the said
disease during his service which had nothing to do with the family conditions
and since the said disease developed in course of his service, he was entitled
to the disability pension.
7. The respondents contested the claim of the appellant before the Armed
Forces Tribunal by contending that the appellant had been posted at peace
station at the time of onset of the disease and being deployed in peace stations,
and it could not have contributed to the said illness nor can the service said to
have aggravated the disease, which was confirmed by the Medical Board on
examination of the appellant as mentioned above. Further, it was contended
that nothing was brought on record to contradict the finding of the Medical
Board and as such the claim of the appellant could not be entertained.
8. In support of the claim of the respondents, a number of decisions of this
Court were relied upon namely; Union of India & Ors. vs. Keshar Singh,
Page 3 of 31



(2007) 12 SCC 675; Union of India & Ors. vs. Surinder Singh Rathore,
(2008) 5 SCC 747; Secretary, Ministry of Defence and Ors. vs.
A.V.Damodaran (Dead) through LRs. and others, (2009) 9 SCC 140; Union
of India & Ors. vs. Jujhar Singh, (2011) 7 SCC 735; Union of India and
Anr. vs. Talwinder Singh, (2012) 5 SCC 480, No. 14666828M EX CFN
Narsingh Yadav vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) 9 SCC 667, and the
decision of Kerala High Court in Baby vs. Union of India, 2003 (3) KLT 362
(FB).
9 . The Tribunal, on consideration of the aforesaid decisions and relevant
Rules made the following observations in para 17 of the impugned judgment,
which are reproduced herebelow:-

Page 4 of 31



service and the conditions of service resulting in the
disablement of the individual. As such, the opinion
of the Medical Board must be given due weight,
value and credence.
(iii) When an individual is physically fit at the time of
enrolment and no note regarding adverse physical
factor is made at the time of entry into service and if
the individual is discharged before the completion
of full tenure on account of his physical disability,
the initial onus of proving that the disability is not
attributable to the Military Service shall be on the
authority. However, in the cases where it is found
on perusal of the available evidence that the
individual had withheld relevant information or that
the service conditions were not such as could have
resulted in physical disability, the onus shall shift to
the claimant.
(iv) The disease which has led to the individuals
discharge will ordinarily be deemed to have arisen
in the course of service if no note of it was made at
the time of individual's acceptance for military
service. However, the above deeming fiction is not
available to the individual if the medical opinion, for
the reasons to be recorded, hold the disease could
not have been detected on medical examination
prior to the claimant's acceptance to the service.
(v) A person claiming disability pension must establish
that the disease or injury suffered by him bears a
causal connection with the military service.
(vi) The direct and circumstantial evidence of the case is
to be taken into account and the benefit of doubt if
any is to be given to the individual.
(vii) A liberal approach is to be adopted in the matter of
services rendered in the field areas.
10. By adopting the aforesaid principles derived from the decisions relied
upon, the Tribunal rejected the claim of the appellant as follows :
Page 5 of 31

Page 6 of 31



military service. The said Regulation 173 is accordingly reproduced herein as
below:
“173. Primary conditions for the grant of disability
pension. — Unless otherwise specifically provided a
disability pension may be granted to an individual who
is invalided from service on account of a disability which
is attributable to or aggravated by military service and
is assessed at 20 per cent or above.

14. The question as to whether the disability is attributable to or aggravated
by military service is to be determined as per Appendix II to the said
Regulations.
Relevant portions in Appendix II read as follows:
“2. Disablement or death shall be accepted as due to
military service provided it is certified that—
(a) The disablement is due to wound, injury or disease
which—
(i) is attributable to military service; or
(ii) existed before or arose during military service and
has been and remains aggravated thereby;
(b) the death was due to or hastened by—
(i) a wound, injury or disease which was attributable to
military service, or
(ii) the aggravation by military service of a wound,
injury or disease which existed before or arose during
military service.
Note.—The rule also covers cases of death after
discharge/invaliding from service.
3. There must be a causal connection between
disablement or death and military service for
attributability or aggravation to be conceded.
4. In deciding on the issue of entitlement all the
evidence, both direct and circumstantial, will be taken
into account and the benefit or reasonable doubt will be
Page 7 of 31

Page 8 of 31



essential to establish whether the disability or death
bore a casual connection with the service conditions. All
evidence, both direct and circumstantial, will be taken
into account and benefit of reasonable doubt, if any, will
be given to the individual. The evidence to be accepted
as reasonable doubt, for the purpose of these
instructions, should be of a degree of cogency, which
though not reaching certainty, nevertheless carry the
high degree of probability. In this connection, it will be
remembered that proof beyond reasonable doubt does
not mean proof beyond a shadow of doubt. If the
evidence is so strong against an individual as to leave
only a remote possibility in his favour, which can be
dismissed with the sentence ‘of course it is possible but
not in the least probable’ the case is proved beyond
reasonable doubt. If on the other hand, the evidence be
so evenly balanced as to render impracticable a
determinate conclusion one way or the other, then the
case would be one in which the benefit of doubt could be
given more liberally to the individual, in cases occurring
in field service/active service areas.

(b) The cause of a disability or death resulting from
wound or injury, will be regarded as attributable to
service if the wound/injury was sustained during the
actual performance of ‘duty’ in armed forces. In case of
injuries which were self-inflicted or due to an
individual's own serious negligence or misconduct, the
Board will also comment how far the disability resulted
from self-infliction, negligence or misconduct.

(c) The cause of a disability or death resulting from a
disease will be regarded as attributable to service when
it is established that the disease arose during service and
the conditions and circumstances of duty in the armed
forces determined and contributed to the onset of the
disease. Cases, in which it is established that service
conditions did not determine or contribute to the onset
of the disease but influenced the subsequent course of the
disease, will be regarded as aggravated by the service.
A disease which has led to an individual's discharge or
death will ordinarily be deemed to have arisen in service
if no note of it was made at the time of the individual's
acceptance for service in the armed forces. However, if
medical opinion holds, for reasons to be stated that the
disease could not have been detected on medical
examination prior to acceptance for service, the disease
will not be deemed to have arisen during service.
Page 9 of 31

17. A careful examination of Regulation 423 of the Regulation for Medical
Services for Armed Forces would reveal the following aspects:
1. It is immaterial whether the cause giving rise to the
disability or death occurred in an area declared to be a
field service/active service area or under normal peace
conditions.
Page 10 of 31



2. It is, however, essential to establish that the disability or
death bore a casual connection with the service
conditions.
3. All evidence, both direct and circumstantial, will be taken
into account and benefit of reasonable doubt, if any, will
be given to the individual.
4. A disease which has led to an individual's discharge or
death will ordinarily be deemed to have arisen in service
if no note of it was made at the time of the individual's
acceptance for service in the armed forces.
5. However, if the medical opinion holds, for reasons to be
stated that the disease could not have been detected on
medical examination prior to acceptance for service, the
disease will not be deemed to have arisen during service.
6. The question, whether a disability or death is attributable
to or aggravated by service or not, will be decided as
regards its medical aspects by a Medical Board or by the
medical officer who signs the certificate. The Medical
Board/medical officer will specify reasons for their/his
opinion .
7. The opinion of the Medical Board/medical officer,
insofar as it relates to the actual cause of the disability or
death and the circumstances in which it originated will be
regarded as final .
Page 11 of 31

18. Having kept the aforesaid aspects in mind, we have examined the
records, more particularly the original records of the Medical Board
Proceedings produced before us, a copy of which is also annexed as Annexure
R-5 to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents.
A careful perusal of the aforesaid medical proceedings reveals the
following :
(i) The details of the field/operational service have been
mentioned in the said proceedings of the Medical Board (as
per Form AFMSF-16) as peace stations as follows:

Page 12 of 31

It is to be noted that under Regulation 423 (a) referred to
above, it is mentioned that for the purpose of determining whether
the cause of disability is attributable to the service, it is immaterial
that the cause giving rise to the disability occurred in an area
declared to be field service/active service area or under normal
peace conditions.
(ii) In para 2 of Part I of the said Form, the particulars of the
disease from which the appellant was suffering from are
mentioned as follows:

(iii) In para 3 and para 4 of Part I of the Form, the following
entries have been made about the negative answers to the
queries:
Page 13 of 31

(iv) Coming to para 5 and para 6 of Part I of the Form, the

following entries have been made:

The aforesaid entries are, therefore, a clear
acknowledgement of the fact that the appellant was not suffering
from the disease of Schizophrenia when he entered the service.
Thus, it would be deemed that this disease arose while in service
as provided under Regulation 423 (e). In fact, the absence of
finding that the appellant was suffering from the disease before
entering service is confirmed by the subsequent entries made in
Parts II and III of the Form as regards his past medical history.
(v) Coming to Part II of the Medical Board proceedings of Form
AFMSF-16, the following entries have been made:

Page 14 of 31

It may be noted that the aforesaid entries in Part II are
devoid of any details, and these have been left blank in the
Form, though these are required to be mentioned in the
Form. It thus clearly shows that the medical history of the
appellant is not recorded. Hence, it can be said that the
Medical Board had not considered the medical history of the
appellant before coming to the conclusion that the disease
the appellant was suffering from is constitutional and did
not arise during service.
(vii) Coming to Part III of the Form AFMSF-16, the following
entries are made:

Page 15 of 31

The Board should state fully the reasons in regard to each disability on which
its opinion is based. (Emphasis added)

Page 16 of 31

19. Perusal of the aforesaid entries made in Part III of the Form AFMSF-
16 reveals that no reasons have been assigned at all as regards the nature of
disability on which the opinion of the Medical Board is based that the
appellant was suffering from constitutional personality disorder, though it has
been specifically mentioned therein that the Medical Board should state fully
the reasons with regard to the disability on which the opinion of the Medical
Board is based.
20. In our opinion, the requirement to give reasons by the Medical Board is
crucial, critical, decisive and necessary for the purpose of granting or denying
Page 17 of 31



disability pension and it is not a mere formality, but a necessary material on
the basis of which the pension sanctioning authority has to decide about the
grant or refusal of disability pension.
21. As noticed above, it has been specifically provided under Clause (d) of
Regulation 423 as quoted that the question as to whether the disability is
attributable to or aggravated by service or not, will be decided as regards its
medical aspects by the Medical Board and the Medical Board will specify
reasons for their opinion and the question whether the cause and attendant
circumstances can be attributed to service will be decided by the pension
sanctioning authority.
22 . Thus, this requirement to give reasons by the Medical Board about their
opinion is in our view absolutely necessary as also required under Regulation
423(d) for the reason that the fate of the future career of the serviceman is
going to be decided by the opinion of the Medical Board, which is to be treated
as final as regards the cause of disability and the circumstances in which the
disability originated. The continuation of the service of the concerned
serviceman and as to whether he will be entitled to disability pension is
dependent on the opinion of the Medical Board which is also to be treated as
the final one.
Page 18 of 31



23 . Hence, the rules mandate giving of reasons by the Medical Board while
rendering its opinion. The reasons given by the Medical Board would
obviously be the basis for determination by the competent authority whether
the serviceman would be discharged from service and whether he would get
disability pension.
24 . Accordingly, in our opinion, if the serviceman is discharged from
service or denied the disability pension on the basis of a medical opinion
which is devoid of reasons, it would strike at the root of the action taken by
the authority and such action cannot be sustained in law.
25 . We, therefore, hold that if any action is taken by the authority for the
discharge of a serviceman and the serviceman is denied disability pension on
the basis of a report of the Medical Board wherein no reasons have been
disclosed for the opinion so given, such an action of the authority will be
unsustainable in law.
26 . In the present case, as noticed from the entries made in Part III of Form
AFSMF-16, no reasons have been given by the Medical Board for their
opinion that the appellant was suffering from Schizophrenia which is of a
constitutional personality disorder and all the relevant columns have been
left blank.
Page 19 of 31



In our view, the finding given in Para 2(d) of Part II by the Medical
Board is merely an opinion or conclusion without assigning any reasons as to
how the Medical Board has come to the aforesaid conclusion that the disability
of the appellant is a constitutional personality disorder. There is a difference
between the “conclusion” or “opinion”, and “reasons” to support such a
conclusion or opinion. The reasons have to be separately mentioned for the
conclusion arrived at by the Medical Board. The bare conclusion arrived by
the Medical Board cannot treated as the reasons for discharge of the
serviceman and denial of invalid pension within the meaning of the
Regulations referred to above.
27. When we refer to the entries made under Part II of Form AFSMF-16, it
is also noticed that said Part II too is devoid of clinical details as regards
personal and relevant family history, specialist report and treatment.
Therefore, we are of the view that in absence of the said particulars which are
required to be recorded or mentioned which would reveal the medical history
of the appellant, the opinion given by the Medical Board in Part III of the
Form AFMSF-16 that the disease is a constitutional personality disorder
cannot be sustained being violative of the mandate contained in Regulation
423 (d) of the Regulation. In legal terms, the opinion of the Medical Board
not being based on any reason or material is to be treated as arbitrary . In
absence of the ground and materials to arrive at a particular conclusion, such
Page 20 of 31

Page 21 of 31



severe, and disabling brain disorder that has affected people
throughout history.

13. The National Institute of Mental Health, USA has
described “schizophrenia” in the following words:
“Schizophrenia is a chronic, severe, and disabling brain
disorder that has affected people throughout history.
People with the disorder may hear voices other people
don't hear. They may believe other people are reading
their minds, controlling their thoughts, or plotting to
harm them. This can terrify people with the illness and
make them withdrawn or extremely agitated. People
with schizophrenia may not make sense when they talk.
They may sit for hours without moving or talking.
Sometimes people with schizophrenia seem perfectly fine
until they talk about what they are really thinking.
Families and society are affected by schizophrenia too.
Many people with schizophrenia have difficulty holding
a job or caring for themselves, so they rely on others for
help. Treatment helps relieve many symptoms of
schizophrenia, but most people who have the disorder
cope with symptoms throughout their lives. However,
many people with schizophrenia can lead rewarding and
meaningful lives in their communities.”
14. Some of the symptoms of schizophrenia are:
14.1.Positive symptoms: Positive symptoms are psychotic
behaviour not seen in healthy people. People with positive
symptoms often “lose touch” with reality. These symptoms can
come and go. Sometimes they are severe and at other times
hardly noticeable, depending on whether the individual is
receiving treatment. They include the following:
Hallucinations.—“Voices” are the most common type of
hallucination in schizophrenia. Hallucinations include seeing
people or objects that are not there, smelling odours that no
one else detects, and feeling things like invisible fingers
touching their bodies when no one is near.
Delusions.—The person believes delusions even after other
people prove that the beliefs are not true or logical. They may
also believe that people on television are directing special
messages to them, or that radio stations are broadcasting their
thoughts aloud to others. Sometimes they believe they are
someone else, such as a famous historical figure. They may
have paranoid delusions and believe that others are trying to
harm them.
Page 22 of 31



Thought disorders.—are unusual or dysfunctional ways of
thinking. One form of thought disorder is called “disorganised
thinking”. This is when a person has trouble organising his or
her thoughts or connecting them logically, a person with a
thought disorder might make up meaningless words, or
“neologisms”.
Movement disorders.—may appear as agitated body
movements. A person with a movement disorder may repeat
certain motions over and over. In the other extreme, a person
may become catatonic. Catatonia is a state in which a person
does not move and does not respond to others. Catatonia is
rare today, but it was more common when treatment for
schizophrenia was not available.
14.2.Negative symptoms: Negative symptoms are associated
with disruptions to normal emotions and behaviours. These
symptoms are harder to recognise as part of the disorder and
can be mistaken for depression or other conditions. These
symptoms include the following:
(i) “Flat effect” (a person's face does not move or he or she
talks in a dull or monotonous voice).
(ii) Lack of pleasure in everyday life.
(iii) Lack of ability to begin and sustain planned activities.
(iv) Speaking little, even when forced to interact.
15. In Modi's Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology (24th
Edn., 2011) the following varieties of schizophrenia have been
noticed:
Simple Schizophrenia.—The illness begins in early
adolescence. There is a gradual loss of interest in the outside
world, from which the person withdraws. There is an all round
impairment of mental faculties and he emotionally becomes
flat and apathetic. He loses interest in his best friends who are
few in number and gives up his hobbies. He has conflicts about
sex, particularly masturbation. He loses all ambition and drifts
along in life, swelling the rank of chronically unemployed.
Complete disintegration of personality does not occur, but
when it does, it occurs after a number of years.
Hebephrenia.—Hebephrenia occurs at an earlier age than
either the katatonic or the paranoid variety. Disordered
thinking is the outstanding characteristic of this kind of
schizophrenia. There is great incoherence of thought, periods
of wild excitement occur and there are illusions and
Page 23 of 31



hallucinations. Delusions which are bizarre in nature, are
frequently present. Often, there is impulsive and senseless
conduct as though in response to their hallucination or
delusions. Ultimately the whole personality may completely
disintegrate.
Katatonia.—Katatonia is the condition in which the period of
excitement alternates with that of katatonic stupor. The patient
is in a state of wild excitement, is destructive, violent and
abusive. He may impulsively assault anyone without the
slightest provocation. Homicidal or suicidal attempts may be
made. Auditory hallucinations frequently occur, which may be
responsible for their violent behaviour. Sometimes, they
destroy themselves because they hear God's voice
commanding them to destroy themselves. This phase may last
from a few hours to a few days or weeks, followed by stage of
stupor.
The katatonic stupor begins with a lack of interest, lack of
concentration and general apathy. He is negative, refuses to
take food or medicines and to carry out his daily routine
activities like brushing his teeth, taking bath or change his
clothes…. The activities are so very limited that he may confine
himself in one place and assume one posture however
uncomfortable, for hours together without getting fatigued.
His face is expressionless and his gaze vacant…. They may
understand clearly everything that is going on around them,
and sometime without warning and without any apparent
cause, they suddenly attack any person standing nearby.
Paranoid Schizophrenia, paranoia and paraphrenia.—
Paranoia is now regarded as a mild form of paranoid
schizophrenia. The main characteristic of this illness is a well-
elaborated delusional system in a personality that is otherwise
well preserved. The delusions are of a persecutory type. The
true nature of the illness may go unrecognised for a long time
because the personality is well preserved, and some of these
paranoiacs may pass off as social reformers or founders of
queer pseudo-religious sects. The classical picture is rare and
generally takes a chronic course.
Paranoid schizophrenia, in the vast majority of cases, starts in
the fourth decade and develops insidiously. Suspiciousness is
the characteristic symptom of the early stage. Ideas of
reference occur, which gradually develop into delusions of
persecution. Auditory hallucinations follow which in the
beginning, start as sounds or noises in the ears, but become
fixed and definite, to lead the patient to believe that he is
persecuted by some unknown person or some superhuman
Page 24 of 31



agency. He believes that his food is being poisoned, some
noxious gases are blown into his room and people are plotting
against him to ruin him. Disturbances of general sensation
give rise to hallucinations, which are attributed to the effects
of hypnotism, electricity, wireless telegraphy or atomic
agencies. The patient gets very irritated and excited owing to
these painful and disagreeable hallucinations and delusions.
Since so many people are against him and are interested in his
ruin, he comes to believe that he must be a very important man.
The nature of delusions thus, may change from persecutory to
grandiose type. He entertains delusions of grandeur, power
and wealth, and generally conducts himself in a haughty and
overbearing manner. The patient usually retains his money
and orientation and does not show signs of insanity, until the
conversation is directed to the particular type of delusion from
which he is suffering. When delusions affect his behaviour, he
is often a source of danger to himself and others.
The name paraphrenia has been given to those suffering from
paranoid psychosis who, in spite of various hallucinations and
more or less systemised delusions, retain their personality in a
relatively intact state. Generally, paraphrenia begins later in
life than the other paranoid psychosis.
Schizo-affective psychosis.—Schizo-affective psychosis is an
atypical type of schizophrenia, in which there are moods or
affect disturbances unlike other varieties of schizophrenia,
where there is blunting or flattening of affect. Attacks of
elation or depression, unmotivated rage, anxiety and panic
occur in this form of schizophrenic illness.
Pseudo-neurotic schizophrenia.—Schizophrenia may start
with overwhelmingly neurotic symptoms, which are so
prominent that in the early stages, it may be diagnosed as
neurosis. When schizophrenia begins in an obsessional
personality, it may for a long time remain disguised as an
apparently obsessional illness.
16. F.C. Redlich and Daniel X. Freedman in their book titled
The Theory and Practice of Psychiatry (1966 Edn.) observed:
“Some schizophrenic reactions, which we call psychoses, may
be relatively mild and transient; others may not interfere too
seriously with many aspects of everyday living…. (p. 252)
Are the characteristic remissions and relapses expressions of
endogenous processes, or are they responses to psychosocial
variables, or both? Some patients recover, apparently
completely, when such recovery occurs without treatment we
Page 25 of 31



speak of spontaneous remission. The term need not imply an
independent endogenous process; it is just as likely that the
spontaneous remission is a response to non-deliberate but
nonetheless favourable psychosocial stimuli other than
specific therapeutic activity….” (p. 465)

“55 . When social security legislations are being interpreted, it
always has to be interpreted liberally with a beneficial
interpretation and has to be given the widest possible meaning
which the language permits, known as beneficial
interpretation. When a statute is meant for the benefit of a
particular class and if a word in the statute is capable of two
meanings i.e. one which would preserve the benefits and one
which would not, then the former is to be adopted.”


31. Under these circumstances, a much more liberal view ought to be
adopted while dealing with the cases of discharge of servicemen from service
Page 26 of 31



on account of suffering from Schizophrenia as they may face several
impediments and difficulties in proving the casual connection of the said
disease with the military service.
32. It is also to be noted that this is not a case where the appellant had
applied for discharge of service on account of suffering from Schizophrenia.
It was the authority themselves who after observing his condition decided to
discharge the appellant from service after obtaining the opinion of the Medical
Board. In such a situation, where the serviceman himself had not applied for
discharge, but has been discharged by the authority, the onus of proving the
disability and grounds of denying disability pension would lie heavily on the
authority. Since it is the statutory requirement that the opinion of the Medical
Board is to be the basis of the discharge, in our view, if the opinion of Medical
Board is devoid of reasons, the act of the authority based on mere opinion sans
reasons can certainly be questioned.
According to us, if the decision of the authority to discharge a
serviceman is based on a medical report which is devoid of reasons, which are
required to be given as also mandated by rules as discussed above, such an act
of the authority specially when it denies any post discharge benefit will be
rendered invalid in the eyes of law.
Page 27 of 31



In such cases, it can be said that the authorities have failed to discharge
the burden of establishing that the employee deserved to be discharged from
service on account of such illness without any benefit of pension and such
action has to be considered arbitrary and liable to be interfered with.
33 . Assigning reasons for the opinion of the Medical Board in the present
case also becomes imperative and salutary for the reason that while the
appellant had pleaded that at the time of entry in the service, this disease was
not detected, but only after about 5 (five) years of service and hence, as per
rules also, it will be deemed that it arose while in service, the Medical Board
gave the opinion that it was a constitutional personality disorder. The opinion
of the Medical Board is, thus, inconsistent with the plea of the appellant.
Hence, it was incumbent upon the Medical Board to assign reasons as to why
the disease is to be treated as a constitutional personality disorder which could
not be detected at the time of entry in service and as the onset of the disease
was only in 1993, which is after about 5 (five) years of entry in service.
Without there being any reasons given by the Medical Board for their opinion
that it was a constitutional personality disorder, we are afraid, it would be
unfair to the appellant that such an opinion of the Medical Board is to be taken
as final and binding to deprive any service benefit to the appellant.
Page 28 of 31



We have also noted that in the entire original record produced before
us, there is no material for coming to the conclusion that the appellant was
suffering from Schizophrenia which is in the nature of constitutional personal
disorder.
34. Thus, in the facts and circumstances discussed above, we are of the
view that while there cannot be any dispute about the correctness of the legal
principles enunciated by this Court in the above-mentioned cases of Keshar
Singh (supra) , Surinder Singh Rathore (supra) , A.V.Damodaran (supra) ;
Jujhar Singh (supra) and Talwinder Singh (supra), we would hasten to add
that the opinion of the Medical Board which is to be treated as final and
binding as per aforesaid Regulations, has to be supported by reasons for
arriving at the conclusion about the nature of medical disability, before the
same can be acted upon for the purpose of discharge of a serviceman and
denial of disability pension as otherwise, a valuable right of a serviceman to
get retiral benefits who has rendered long years of service for the nation
would be unjustly deprived.
35 . It may also be noted that in A.V. Damodaran (supra) where this Court
had dealt with the discharge due to Schizophrenia, the Medical Board had
given detailed reasons for their opinion as mentioned in Para 4 of the aforesaid
decision, which is not the case in other cited cases and also in the present case.
Page 29 of 31



The issue of giving reasons for the opinion of the Medical Board has not been
discussed in these cited cases.
36 . Accordingly, we hold that the order of discharge of the appellant and
denial of disability pension to him based on a medical opinion without
providing full reasons to support the opinion cannot be said to be valid.
37 . The question which would arise for consideration now is whether we
should remit the matter to the Medical Board at this stage for reconsideration
in the light of our observations made above. We, however, feel that adopting
the aforesaid course of action at this stage after about 27 (twenty-seven) years
of the appellant being invalided from service on 18.05.1998, would not be in
the interest of justice.
38. Resultantly, while we do not disturb the order of discharge of the
appellant from service on the ground of medical invalidity due to
Schizophrenia, we direct the respondents that the appellant be granted
disability pension with immediate effect with all attending benefits, as per
rules. However, the appellant will not be entitled to any arrears of invalid
pension, except for the last three years.
39 . For the reasons discussed above, the appeal stands allowed.
Consequently, the impugned order of rejection of disability pension dated
04.01.1999 passed by the Principal Controller of Defence Account (Pension),
Page 30 of 31



Allahabad, order passed by the First Appellate Committee on 22.05.2000, and
order dated 17.01.2013 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional
Bench, Kochi, in OA No.100 of 2011 are set aside with the above directions.

……………………………J.
(ABHAY S. OKA)

0



….……………….…………………………J.
(NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH)

NEW DELHI;
MAY 07, 2025.
Page 31 of 31