Kerala High Court Upholds Disability Pension For Army Veteran Discharged Due To Schizophrenia, Faults Unreasoned Medical Board Opinion

The Kerala High Court has reaffirmed that armed forces personnel invalided out of service due to schizophrenia are entitled to the benefit of statutory presumptions under military pension rules unless the authorities provide reasons to deny disability pension.A Division Bench comprising Justice K. Natarajan and Justice Johnson John dismissed a writ petition filed by the Union of India challenging an Armed Forces Tribunal order granting disability pension to the widow of a deceased ex-serviceman.The deceased personnel, Sreekandan Nair, was recruited into the Indian Army in 1973 and invalided out in 1979 after being diagnosed with schizophrenia assessed at 60% disability for two years. His claim for disability pension was rejected on the ground that the disease was constitutional in origin and neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service.The Armed Forces Tribunal later set aside that decision, holding that the Medical Board had offered no reasons for its conclusion. The Union of India challenged the Tribunal's order before the High Court.The High Court observed,"The provisions for grant of disability pension are in the nature of a beneficial scheme and in this case, the service man has not opted out of service on account of suffering from Schizophrenia. But, he was invalided out from army service by the authority after obtaining the opinion of the medical board and in such a situation, the onus of proving the disability and grounds of denying disability pension would lie heavily on the authority, especially in view of the statutory presumptions. Regulation 423(c) of the Regulations for Medical Services for Armed Forces, 1983 inter alia provides that a disease which has led to an individual's discharge or death will ordinarily be deemed to have arisen in service, if no note of it was made at the time of the individual's acceptance for service in the armed forces.However, if medical opinion holds, for reasons to be stated that the disease could not have been detected on medical examination prior to acceptance for service, the disease will not be deemed to have arisen during service. In the present case, even though it is stated in the report of the medical board that the disease is constitutional in origin, no reasoning has been given for arriving at such a finding. In Rajumon (supra), the Honourable Supreme Court held that if the opinion of the medial board is devoid of reasons, the act of the authority based on mere opinion sans reasons can certainly be questioned and such an act of the authority which denies any post discharge benefit will be rendered invalid in the eyes of law". The court observed that in the present case, the medical board had not stated any reasons for their finding that the disease is constitutional in origin and thus the court found no jurisdictional error or error apparent on the face of the record in the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal warranting interference by the high court. The High Court examined the Medical Board's conclusion in light of the Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982 and Regulation 423(c) of the Regulations for Medical Services for Armed Forces, 1983.Under these provisions, when no note of a disease exists at the time of enrolment, the disease is ordinarily presumed to have arisen during service unless medical authorities record reasons showing that it could not have been detected earlier.The Union argued that courts and tribunals cannot substitute their conclusions for those of expert medical boards. It further contended that the AFT had exceeded its jurisdiction in interfering with the findings of the Release Medical Board.The Bench held that a mere conclusion without supporting reasons cannot defeat the statutory presumption operating in favour of the serviceman.“It is well settled that when social security legislations are being interpreted, it always has to be interpreted liberally with a beneficial interpretation and has to be given the widest possible meaning which the language permits and if a word in the statute is capable of two meanings, i.e., one which would preserve the benefits and one which would not, then the former is to be adopted.” Court noted. The Court further observed that the provisions for grant of disability pension are in the nature of a beneficial scheme and in the present case, the service man has not opted out of service on account of suffering from Schizophrenia. Instead, he was invalidated out of the army by the authority after obtaining the opinion of the medical board. The Court noted that in such a situation, the onus of proving disability and grounds of denying the disability pension lies on the authority under the statutory presumptions under Regulations for Medical Services for Armed Forces, 1983. The Court noted that the Medical Board had termed schizophrenia “constitutional in origin,” but failed to disclose any reasoning for arriving at that conclusion. In such...

Kerala High Court Upholds Disability Pension For Army Veteran Discharged Due To Schizophrenia, Faults Unreasoned Medical Board Opinion

Anamika MJ

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Anamika MJ

Kerala High Court Upholds Disability Pension For Army Veteran Discharged Due To Schizophrenia, Faults Unreasoned Medical Board Opinion

Anamika MJ

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Anamika MJ

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers