DISABILITY PENSION CANNOT BE DENIED BASED ON UNREASONED MEDICAL OPINIONS IGNORING SERVICE-INDUCED STRESS AND STRAIN.

The respondent was enrolled in the Corps of Signals of the Indian Army on 07.10.1988.

After 32 years of service, he was discharged on 30.06.2021 in a Low Medical Category due to "Primary Hypertension" and "Dyslipidemia," assessed at a composite disability of 33.5% for life.

The Release Medical Board (RMB) opined that the disabilities were "Neither Attributable to Nor Aggravated" (NANA) by service because the onset occurred while the respondent was posted at a "Peace Station".

The respondent’s claim for a disability pension was rejected, but the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) later allowed his application (O.A. No. 423 of 2022), leading the Union of India to file this writ petition.

1. Whether a disability detected at a peace station automatically precludes a finding of attributability or aggravation by military service for the purposes of a disability pension.

2. Whether the Medical Board is legally mandated to provide specific reasons for its opinion when declaring a disease to be neither attributable to nor aggravated by service.

The court primarily applied Regulation 173 of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961, which mandates disability pension if the disability is attributable to or aggravated by service and is 20% or above.

It relied on Appendix II (Entitlement Rules), Clause 3 and 4, which establish the "causal connection" requirement and the "benefit of reasonable doubt" in favor of the claimant.

It further interpreted Regulation 423 of the Regulations for Medical Services for Armed Forces, 1983, which clarifies that it is "immaterial" whether the cause occurred in a field or peace area, and stipulates that a disease not noted at entry is deemed to have arisen in service unless medical reasons prove otherwise.

The court also followed the precedent in Dharamvir Singh v. Union of India (2013) 7 SCC 316, affirming the presumption of sound health at the time of enrollment.

The Court observed that the respondent was admittedly fit upon enrollment.

It criticized the RMB's findings as "routine" and "devoid of details," noting that the RMB failed to record the respondent's medical history or provide a reasoned justification for its "NANA" conclusion.

The Court held that the RMB’s reliance on the "Peace Station" onset was legally flawed because Regulation 423(a) explicitly states the location of onset is immaterial.

Reasoning that even peace stations involve rigorous training and stress, the Court found that the burden of proof lay on the authorities to displace the presumption of service-related aggravation.

Furthermore, the lack of reasons in the RMB report was deemed a violation of Regulation 423(d), as such opinions are final and decisively impact a serviceman's career and retiral benefits.

The Court dismissed the writ petition, upheld the AFT’s order, and directed the petitioners to grant the respondent a disability pension with immediate effect and all attending benefits.