G H Union of India & Ors. v. Wing Commander S.P. Rathore
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
1. The short question involved in this appeal filed by the Union of
India is whether disability pension is at all payable in case of a Air Force
Officer who superannuated from service in the natural course and whose
disability is less than 20%.
2. We may make reference to the Defence Service Regulatio ns
Pension Regulations for the Air Force, 1961. Regulations 37(a) and (b)
under the heading “Disability Pension – when admissible” read as follows :
“37(a) An officer who is retired from air force service on account
of a disability which is attributable to or aggravated by such service
and is assessed at 20 percent or over may, on retire ment be
awarded disability pension consisting of a service element and a
disability element in accordance with the regulations in this section.
(b) The question whether a disability is attributable to or aggravated
by air force service shall be determined under the regulations in
Appendix II.”
3. A bare reading of the aforesaid provision makes it clear that an
officer of the Air Force who retires on attaining the age of superannuation
is entitled to disability pension only if disability is assesse d at 20% or
above. Furthermore, this disability must be attributable or aggravated by
service rendered in the Air Force.
4. So far as the second part is concerned, we are not going into
that issue since in this case, it is admitted that the disability was aggravated
due to service rendered in the Air Force. The only issue is whether the
Appellant not having 20% disability is at all entitled to disability pension.
5. Both learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India
and learned counsel appearing for the Respondent rely upon Paras 7 .2
and 8.2 of Circular dated 31.1.2001 issued by Ministry of Defence which
read as follows :
“7.2 Where an Armed Forced personnel is invalided out under
circumstances mentioned in Para 4.1 above, the extent of disability
or functional incapacity shall be determined in the following manner
for the purposes of computing the disability element:-
993
assessed by invaliding
medical board
for computing of disability
element
Less than 50 50
Between 50 and 75 75
Between 76 and 100 100
“8.2 For disabilities less than 100% but not less than 20% the
above rates shall be proportionately reduced. No disability element
shall be payable for disabilities less than 20%. Provisions contained
in Para 7.2 above shall not be applicable for computing disability
element. Disability actually assessed by the duly approved Release
Medical Board/Invaliding Medical Board as accepted by the
Pension Sanctioning Authority, shall reckon for computing disability
element.”
6. Para 8.2 falls under the heading of Disability Element on
Disability/Discharge. A bare reading of Para 8.2 shows tha t where the
disability is more than 20% but less than 80%, the rates prescribed earlier
would be proportionately reduced. Again, it is made clear that no disability
element shall be payable for disabilities less than 20% . Para 8.2 also
provides that the provisions contained in Para 7.2 shall not be applicable
for computing disability element in such cases. Para 7.2 w hich deals
with officials of Armed Forces invalided out under c ircumstances
mentioned in Para 4.1 would be entitled to rounding of the disa bility.
Therefore, if the disability was less than 50%, it would be rounded off to
50%. If the disability was between 50 and 75% it would be rounded off
to 75%. If the disability was between 76 and 100% it would be rounded
off to 100%.
7. Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the
Respondent on the Order dated 10.12.2014 of this Court in “Union of
India and Ors. Versus Ram Avtar” (Civil Appeal No.418 of 2012 etc.)
and subsequent letter dated 18.4.2016 sent by the Ministry of Defence
to the Chief of all the Armed Forces.
8. This Court in Ram Avtar (supra), while approving the judgment
of the Armed Forces Tribunal only held that the principle of rounding off
as envisaged in Para 7.2 referred to herein above would be ap plicable
even to those who superannuated under Para 8.2. The Court did not
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. v. WING COMMANDER
S. P. RATHORE [DEEPAK GUPTA, J.]
deal with the issue of entitlement to disability pens ion under the
Regulations of Para 8.2.
9. As pointed out above, both Regulation 37(a) and Para 8.2 clearly
provide that the disability element is not admissible if the disability is less
than 20%. In that view of the matter, the question of rounding off would
not apply if the disability is less than 20%. If a person is not entitled to
the disability pension, there would be no question of rounding off.
10. The Armed Forces Tribunal (‘AFT’), in our opinion, put the
cart before the horse. It applied the principles of rounding off without
determining whether the petitioner/applicant before it would entitled to
disability pension at all.
11. In view of the provisions referred to above, we are clearly of
the view that the original petitioner/applicant before the AFT is not entitled
to disability pension. Therefore, the question of applying the provisions
of Para 7.2 would not arise in his case. In this view of the matter, we set
aside the order of the AFT and consequently, the original applic ation
filed by the Respondent before the AFT shall stand dismissed.
The appeal is allowed accordingly.
Bibhuti Bhushan Bose Appeal allowed.