Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court orders the Centre to stop dragging retired armed forces personnel to court over disability pension disputes.
- A policy decision is necessary to scrutinize disability pension appeals before escalating them to the apex court.
- Heavy costs will be imposed in cases where the government fails to adopt a clear policy and continues to file frivolous appeals.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court expressed strong disapproval of the government’s practice of filing repeated appeals against disability pension cases. Repeated appeals have led to prolonged litigation, affecting the morale of the armed forces.
A bench comprising Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan emphasized the need for a policy decision on which AFT orders regarding disability pensions should be challenged before the Supreme Court.
“Every member of the armed forces who receives relief from the tribunal need not be dragged to this court,” the bench remarked.
The court ordered the Centre to disclose by April 3, 2025, whether it intends to implement a policy to scrutinize disability pension appeals before escalating them to the apex court.
Justice Oka observed that a pragmatic approach was necessary, particularly for personnel who serve for 15-20 years and develop service-related disabilities.
“Why should lance naiks, subedars, or radio fitters be subjected to prolonged litigation for disability pensions? Some discretion is needed. Perhaps cases with higher financial implications for the government can be considered for appeal, but not every case,” Justice Oka asserted.
He further emphasized the impact on the morale of the armed forces, stating, “When members of the armed forces see their disability pension cases dragged to the Supreme Court despite tribunal rulings in their favour, it affects morale.”
The court warned that if the government fails to adopt a clear policy and continues to file frivolous appeals, heavy costs will be imposed in such cases.
The case in question involved retired radio fitter Sgt. Rohitash Kumar Sharma, who served in the Indian Air Force from November 14, 1995, to November 30, 2015. Diagnosed with severe obstructive sleep apnea, assessed at 15-19 percent disability, his pension claim was rejected on the grounds that his condition was “neither attributable to nor aggravated by service.”
Sgt. Sharma argued that his condition was a result of postings in high-altitude and remote areas, including Jammu & Kashmir, Sikkim, and Assam, as well as stressful shift work. The Armed Forces Tribunal ruled in his favor, granting him disability pension with rounding off benefits.
The Union of India challenged the AFT order, maintaining that his condition was due to obesity and did not meet the 20 per cent eligibility threshold. However, the AFT noted inconsistencies in the assessment and relied on precedents to support Sgt. Sharma’s claim.
Justice Oka Warned of Heavy Costs for Frivolous Appeals by the Union of India and directed a policy shift, on the issue of disability pension appeals and the need to prioritize the welfare of retired armed forces personnel.
