Supreme Court dismisses MoD appeal against disabled soldier

Vijay Mohan

Chandigarh, March 1

The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the central government against an order passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal granting disability pension to a soldier.

Naik Yogendra Pal Singh, a gunner hailing from Haryana, had suffered an injury while on authorised leave which left his foot permanently damaged.

While the medical board had declared his disability as “not attributable to military service” since the same had occurred while on leave, it had, however, opined that his disability was “aggravated by stress and strain of service” since the soldier had continued to serve the Army after sustaining the disability. As per rules, only one criterion out of the two – “attributable” or “aggravated”, is required for grant of disability pension.

Despite having an “aggravated” disability, the soldier’s claim was rejected after which he moved the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal. A bench comprising Justice Mohammad Tahir and Vice Admiral AG Thapliyal had directed the government to release his disability pension as per rules. 

Rather than complying with the order, the Centre went into appeal which was dismissed by the Supreme Court based on the report of the medical board itself.

Experts dealing with the subject say that despite multiple directions to the Ministry of Defence (MoD) from time to time by the Defence Minister and strictures by the Supreme Court, the practice of filing appeals against disabled soldiers has not slowed down.

A lawyer dealing with such matters says that in many matters decided in favour of disabled soldiers, the authorities as a routine resist their implementation by filing multiple applications and appeals. The Supreme Court in the recent past had asked the MoD to “introspect” and to let go of the “couldn’t-care-less” attitude. 

MoD sources claimed that the move to challenge relatively minor benefits of individual soldiers, officers and families is mostly initiated from within the Army, with the MoD having very little role to play. Adding that the ministry cannot monitor each and every matter, an MoD official pointed out that from its side the ministry has already issued directions not to challenge matters involving individual benefits or those matters which are already covered by judgments of High Courts and the Supreme Court.