Personnel medically invalidated for disabilities aggravated by service are entitled to ex-gratia compensation.

The Petitioner was appointed as a Head Constable (Ministerial) in the 8th Battalion of the Border Security Force (BSF) on 22.10.2013

On 14.03.2024, a Release Medical Board (RMB) diagnosed him with ‘Mixed Anxiety Depressive Disorder’ with 48% permanent disability, declaring him unfit for further service

While the disability was not deemed strictly attributable to service, the RMB recorded that it was aggravated by the stress and strain of military service

Consequently, the Petitioner was invalidated from service on 14.05.2024 under Rule 25 of the BSF Rules, 1969

Although granted an invalidity pension, he was denied ex-gratia compensation, prompting this writ petition seeking benefits under Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Office Memorandums (OMs)

Whether the Petitioner is entitled to ex-gratia compensation under the MHA Office Memorandums dated 21.04.2011 and 07.06.2017 when his medical invalidation resulted from a disability aggravated by the stress and strain of military service.

The Court applied the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Office Memorandums dated 21.04.2011 and 07.06.2017, which mandate the payment of ex-gratia compensation to Central Paramilitary Force personnel who become incapacitated due to causes attributable to or aggravated by government service

The Court further relied on the judicial precedent set in Kallu Ram v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 4042/2025, which established that once the RMB finds a disability aggravated by service and the department acts on such findings to board out an individual, the personnel is entitled to ex-gratia benefits

The Court observed that the Respondents relied entirely on the RMB report to terminate the Petitioner's service on grounds of physical unfitness; therefore, they are bound by the findings therein

The RMB unequivocally certified that the Petitioner's condition—‘Mixed Anxiety Depressive Disorder’—was aggravated by the "stress and strain of military service"

The Court reasoned that since the Respondents accepted the RMB’s findings to justify medical invalidation, they cannot selectively ignore the portion of the report stating the disability was aggravated by service to deny financial benefits

Finding the facts identical to the precedent in Kallu Ram, the Court held that the Petitioner met the criteria stipulated in the MHA OMs for ex-gratia compensation

The Court directed Respondent No. 2 to disburse the said compensation within four weeks

It further ordered that if the payment is not made within the stipulated timeframe, the amount shall carry an interest of 12% per annum calculated from the date of the Petitioner's discharge (14.05.2024) until the actual date of payment