HC allows grant of disability pension to ex-serviceman suffering from diabetes

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that unless there is proof that a soldier developed diabetes during military service due to consumption of “prohibited foods or never engaged in physical activity”, the authorities cannot deny him disability pension after his discharge from army for medical reasons. grounds

The court dismissed a petition filed by the Central government seeking to set aside the orders passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal here, which allowed a claim for grant of disability pension to an ex-serviceman.

According to the details of the case, the ex-serviceman was drafted into the army on January 20, 2003 and discharged from service on October 31, 2019 “on his own accord on compassionate grounds before the end of his term of service” under the medical category. “due to disability – severe depressive episode and type 2 diabetes.”

At the time of his discharge from military service, his disability was assessed at 50% for life, but was found to be neither related to, nor aggravated by, military service.

Thus, in a letter dated November 4, 2019, the defendant’s claim for disability pension was rejected.

The centre, in its plea in the high court, claimed that his disability was not only genetically related but was also a lifestyle disease that arose during his service in peacetime.

But the high court noted that at the time of enrollment, the medical board should make a note about the disease, including whether it was genetically related and whether it was likely to occur, but in this case this was not done.

The High Court also held that the regulations did not state that the occurrence of a disease in a peace zone could not be attributed to military service.

“…Even if this respondent’s disease occurred in a peaceful area, the said attacks should be declared aggravated or related to military service,” he ruled.

The court noted that the cause of “type II diabetes” is improper nutrition and insufficient physical activity.

However, if “no evidence was provided that he consumed prohibited food or never engaged in physical activity, therefore, the said rashes/causes cannot be attributed to the present respondent (soldier),” the high court ruled.

Since the said evidence is not given and not discussed, so the medical commission fixed the said reasons on this defendant, thus, it appears to be the most conjecture.

The defendant submitted the first complaint to the Appeals Committee. However, by letter dated March 5, 2020, this was rejected.

The defendant then appealed the order of March 5, 2020 to the Second Appeals Board, in which, by order of March 15, 2021, he recognized the first disability, i.e., a “major depressive episode,” as aggravated by military service at 40% for life. but rejected the second disability — “Diabetes type II” — as not aggravated and not related to military service.

Feeling aggrieved, the soldier filed an application before the appropriate Armed Forces Tribunal challenging the refusal order issued. His request was granted by order dated 22 April 2022 and the AFT ruled that the claimant was entitled to a disability pension which included a disability element and a service element.

Aggrieved by the AFT’s orders, the petitioner – the central government – moved the high court here.