The Supreme Court has directed the Indian Army to grant disability pension to a veteran who was discharged after being diagnosed with schizophrenia during his service. The bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and N. Kotiswar Singh emphasized that disability pension is a beneficial provision under the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961, which must be interpreted liberally.
Read also: Supreme Court Issues Split Verdict on Guilt of Ex-TN Minister’s Wife in Disproportionate Assets Case
The veteran had joined the Indian Army on November 17, 1988, and was discharged on March 30, 1998, after being diagnosed with schizophrenia, a form of mental illness, while still in service. A Medical Board, however, concluded that his condition was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service, labeling it as a constitutional (hereditary) disorder. This assessment led the Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions) to deny his disability pension, a decision later upheld by the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), Kochi.
Challenging this, the veteran approached the Supreme Court, arguing that the Medical Board’s conclusion lacked proper reasoning and that he was medically fit at the time of his enrolment. He asserted that the burden of proving that his condition was not related to service rested with the Army, which had failed to do so.
"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…decided to discharge the appellant from service… In such a situation… the onus of proving the disability and grounds of denying disability pension would lie heavily on the authority." — Supreme Court
The Supreme Court found merit in the veteran’s argument, noting that since his illness emerged during service and he was discharged based on the Medical Board's opinion, the burden of proving that the illness was not related to service lay with the authorities. The Court criticized the Medical Board’s assessment for lacking clear reasons and evidence to support its conclusion that the illness was a constitutional disorder.
"Assigning reasons for the opinion of the Medical Board…becomes imperative… Without there being any reasons given… we are afraid, it would be unfair to the appellant…", the Court observed.
The Court highlighted that the Medical Board had failed to provide any evidence that the veteran’s condition existed before his enrolment or was not aggravated by military service. It further stated that denying disability pension based on an unsupported opinion was legally invalid.
"Accordingly, we hold that the order of discharge of the appellant and denial of disability pension… cannot be said to be valid." — Supreme Court
Case Title: RAJUMON T.M. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Appearance:
For Appellant(s): Mr. Thomas P. Joseph, Sr. Adv. Mr. Tom Joseph, AOR Dr. Duvvada Ramesh, Adv.
For Respondent(s): Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, A.S.G. Mr. Shashank Bajpai, Adv. Mr. Shyam Gopal, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Chinmayee Chandra, Adv. Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Adv. Mr. Kartik Dey, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Akshat Kaushik, Adv.
