Justices K Natarajan and Johnson John heard the matter on May 26.

The order highlighted that the provisions for the grant of disability pension are like a beneficial scheme, and in this case, the serviceman had not opted out of service on account of having schizophrenia.

It continued, “But he was invalided out of 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.”

Court’s findings

• 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 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, the medical board has not stated any reasons for their finding that the disease is constitutional in origin.
• The court found no jurisdictional error or error apparent on the face of the record in the order of the AFT warranting interference, and therefore, dismissed the plea.

Schizophrenia and legal battle

• The petition was filed by the Union of India, challenging the order of the AFT which granted disability pension to the deceased pensioner on the application of the widow.
• The husband of the woman was recruited into the Indian Army in August 1973 and invalided out in July 1979 due to schizophrenia.
• The disability pension claim was rejected, and subsequently, his appeal to the Defence Ministry was also rejected. He died in 1994.
• The tribunal, however, found that the finding of the medical board that the disability ‘schizophrenia’ is constitutional in origin is not supported by any reasoning, and therefore, the pensioner is entitled to get disability pension at 60 per cent for two years.
• Representing the government, advocate Vaidyanathan S argued that the report of the medical board would show that the disability is neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service, and the tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction by making its own conclusions over and above the report of the release medical board.
• Appearing for the woman, advocate Rati Varma argued that the onus of proving that the disability is not attributable to military service is on the authority, especially when an individual is physically fit at the time of enrolment, and no note regarding an adverse physical factor is made at the time of entering service.
• In this case, the medical board has not given any reason for the conclusion that the disability is constitutional in origin, Varma stated.

Can Army deny pension for Schizophrenia?

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed a plea filed by the centre challenging an Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) order that granted disability pension to a former soldier diagnosed with Schizophrenia.

A division bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Sanjay Parihar was dealing with a plea of the state against the AFT order to grant the disability pension.

“It is not in dispute that when the soldier was accepted into service, he was found physically and mentally fit by the authority, and, therefore, the disease ‘Schizophrenia’, which he was found suffering from at the time of his discharge, occurred during service,” the court said on February 13. The order added that the burden to prove the absence of a causal connection between the disability and the army was also on the military authorities.

What Punjab and Haryana High Court said

Earlier, the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a plea filed by the Union of India, ruling that armed forces personnel discharged due to disabilities attributable to military service are entitled to the service element of their disability pension, even if they have not completed the 15-year minimum service period.

A bench of Justices Harsimran Singh Sethi and Deepak Manchanda was dealing with a plea of the Centre challenging the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) order, which directed the government to grant the service element of disability pension who had served for approximately nine years.

“Counsel for the petitioners has not been able to rebut the said settled principles of law according to which, even if an officer has less than 15 years of service in credit but has been discharged from service on the ground of disability suffered by the officer concerned during the service, the service element has to be taken into account as per Regulation 183 of the 1961 regulations,” the high court said on its May 8 order.

Kerala HC dismissed plea

Previously, the Kerala High Court had dismissed a review petition filed by the Centre regarding the grant of disability element of pension to a retired Army officer, emphasising that review jurisdiction cannot be utilised as an appeal in disguise to re-litigate settled matters.

A division bench of Justices Anil K Narendran and Muralee Krishna S was dealing with a plea of the Union of India challenging the division bench order that upheld the tribunal order granting the disability element of pension to a retired Army officer who sustained a 20 per cent disability.

In its May 20 order, the court said, “The attempt of the petitioners is only to reagitate the issue already found against them by using the review jurisdiction as an appeal in disguise.”