An unreasoned medical-board opinion cannot rebut the presumption that disability arose during military service.

Babu Ram served in the Indian Army from 7 December 1971 until 31 December 1995, then re-enrolled in the Defence Security Corps (DSC) on 16 March 1998 and was discharged on 31 March 2008.

A Release Medical Board assessed his bilateral cataract with pseudophakia at 15–19% and found it neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service; his disability-pension claim and appeals were rejected.

The Armed Forces Tribunal allowed his application, awarding disability pension at 50% from 25 June 2014, with arrears limited to three years preceding the application and interest at 8% if payment was delayed.

The Union of India and other authorities challenged that order by writ petition.

Whether Babu Ram was entitled to disability pension despite the Release Medical Board’s opinion that his disability was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service.

Whether the Tribunal could decline to accept the Medical Board’s opinion where it gave no reasons for that conclusion.

Under the principles in Dharamvir Singh v. Union of India, (2013) 7 SCC 316, and Union of India v. Rajbir Singh, (2015) 12 SCC 264, a person is presumed to have entered service in sound physical and mental condition, subject to disabilities recorded at entry; where a disability manifests during service and was not recorded at enrolment, it is ordinarily presumed to have arisen in service unless that presumption is rebutted by reasoned medical evidence.

Regulations 179 and 266 of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961, as applied to DSC personnel, were relied on in considering entitlement for a person discharged on completion of engagement while suffering from a qualifying service-related disability.

Under Sukhvinder Singh v. Union of India, a disability pension cannot be denied solely because the assessed disability is below 20%.

The judgment also relied on Union of India v. Ram Avtar, Civil Appeal No. 418 of 2012, for rounding off of disability pension.

Babu Ram’s disability was not recorded at either his initial enrolment or his DSC re-enrolment, and it manifested during service.

The Release Medical Board gave no reasons for finding the condition neither attributable to nor aggravated by service; accordingly, its opinion did not rebut the presumption operating in Babu Ram’s favour.

The Court held that a Medical Board’s opinion, though entitled to due weight, is not conclusive and remains subject to judicial scrutiny, particularly where it is unreasoned and inconsistent with the governing principles.

It therefore found no error in the Tribunal’s application of the relevant regulations or in granting the pension and rounding-off benefit.

It dismissed the writ petition and connected applications, leaving in place the Tribunal’s award of disability pension at 50% from 25 June 2014, subject to its directions on arrears and interest.