Don't Drag Each & Every Armed Forces Member Who Gets Disability Pension To Court; Evolve Policy On Appeals : Supreme Court To Union Govt

The Supreme Court while hearing an appeal filed by the Union of India against an order of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) granting disability pension to a retired radio fitter, remarked that the government should not drag retired members of the armed forces to court in such cases.“Several appeals are being filed by the Union of India in this court challenging the orders of the Armed Forces Tribunal wherein the benefit of disability pension has been granted to members of the armed forces when they are invalidated after working for several years. Each and every member of the armed forces who gets the relief of grant of disability pension from the tribunal need not be dragged to this Court”, the Court stated.A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan called for a policy decision by the centre on which orders of the AFT awarding disability pension should be challenged in the Supreme Court.“As in case of tax matters we are of the view that the government of India must evolve a policy. There has to be some scrutiny before a decision is taken to drag members of the armed forces to the Supreme Court. We call upon the Union of India to disclose whether it is going to take such a policy decision before the next date”, the Court ordered, keeping the case on April 3, 2025.Justice Oka observed that a pragmatic approach should be taken in such matters. He stated that when individuals serve for 15-20 years and develop some disability, leading to an order by the Tribunal granting them disability pension, they should not be brought before the Supreme Court unnecessarily. Justice Oka said that the Court often showed magnanimity by not imposing costs on such frivolous appeals by Union of India against AFT orders.He further questioned why personnel such as lance naiks, subedars, and radio fitters etc. should be subjected to prolonged litigation. Justice Oka emphasized the need for a policy to determine which cases should be taken to the Supreme Court, such as cases involving personnel with high salaries where granting disability pension would have significant financial implications for the government.“Some pragmatic view has to be taken. Somebody works for 15, 20 years. There is some disability, and order of the Tribunal to pay a disability pension. There are lance naiks, subedars, or radio fitters like him. Why should these persons be dragged to the Supreme Court? There should be some discretion. There should be some policy of who is taken to Supreme Court. Maybe someone whose salary is very high and there will be higher monetary implications for the government by granting the disability pension, those matters we”, he said.Justice Oka further remarked that the Supreme Court has encountered numerous cases where frivolous appeals by Union of India have been filed and stressed the importance of maintaining the morale of the armed forces. “We are also interested in maintaining the morale of the armed forces. Now members of the armed forces notice that the armed forces get rid of their services, for everything first they have to go to the Tribunal and even if they go to the Tribunal and succeed they are dragged to Supreme Court. What will be the effect of this on members of the armed forces?”, he said.He also warned that if the government fails to adopt a policy and continues to file frivolous appeals, the court would have to start imposing heavy costs in such cases.BackgroundThe case before the Supreme Court pertained to an order passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal in favor of a retired radio fitter Sgt. Rohitash Kumar Sharma.He enrolled in the Indian Air Force on November 14, 1995, and was discharged on November 30, 2015. He was assessed with a 15-19 percent disability by the Release Medical Board (RMB) on April 27, 2015. The RMB found his severe obstructive sleep apnea neither attributable to nor aggravated (NANA) by service. His disability pension claim was rejected on July 8, 2015, along with his First and Second Appeals on September 27, 2016, and January 19, 2018.He argued that he was medically fit at enrolment and that service conditions, including postings in high-altitude and remote areas, contributed to his condition. He argued that his duties in high-altitude and remote locations, as well as shift work in defence ground environmental systems, led to stress and strain, impacting his health. He detailed his postings in J&K, Sikkim, Assam, and high-altitude areas, including Dalhousie (above 10,000 feet), Air Force Station Bhuj during the 2001 earthquake, and Air Force Station Srinagar. He claimed his condition worsened over time due to environmental factors and service conditions, leading to his disability.The Union of India contended that his disability was influenced by obesity, and assessed below the 20 percent eligibility threshold. They maintained he was only entitled to a service pension.The Armed Forces Tribunal noted that disability assessments of 15-19 percent were inherently uncertain, with variations...

Don't Drag Each & Every Armed Forces Member Who Gets Disability Pension To Court; Evolve Policy On Appeals : Supreme Court To Union Govt

Amisha Shrivastava

The Court warned the government against filing frivolous appeals and stressed the need to maintain the morale of armed forces personnel.

Tags