Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with orders directing payment of disability pension to two army personnel, underscoring that soldiers defend the country often in harsh and inhospitable conditions and the possibility of disease and disability come as a “package deal with the desire to serve the country”.

In a judgment passed on March 27, a bench headed by Justice C. Hari Shankar struck down the Centre’s challenge to the grant of disability pension to two soldiers on the ground that they were on “peace posting” and their ailments could not be attributed to military service.

The court recalled former US President John F. Kennedy’s “stirring words” on patriotism and said that while “we sip our hot cappuccinos by the fireplace”, soldiers are “braving icy winds at the border, willing to lay down their lives at a moment’s notice”.

“The possibility of disease and disability, therefore, comes as a package deal with the desire and determination to serve the country. The bravest of soldiers is prone, given the conditions in which he serves the nation, to fall prey to bodily ailments, which, at times, may be disabling in nature, rendering him unable to continue in military service,” the bench, also having Justice Ajay Digpaul, said.

“In such circumstances, the least that the nation can do, by way of recompense for the selfless service that the soldier has lent it, is to provide comfort and solace during the years that remain,” the court added.

“President John F. Kennedy’s stirring words during his inaugural address represent, to this day, the grand summation of everything that patriotism, and love for one’s nation, means and represents: ‘Ask not what your country can do for you; ask for what you can do for your country.’

“There are those who make it part of their lives and are willing to sacrifice their all for their country — who, while we sip our hot cappuccinos by the fireplace, are braving icy winds at the border, willing to lay down their lives at a moment’s notice. Can anything that the nation, and we as its citizens, give to these true sons of the motherland ever be too much?” the bench said.

The court observed that the human body is not always able to “keep pace with the spirit” and the laws therefore provide for financial benefits, such as disability pension, to soldiers who encounter disease or disability which is attributable to or aggravated by military service.

The Centre had challenged orders of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) allowing disability pension to a former officer who enrolled in 1985 and was discharged from service in 2015 as he was suffering from diabetes mellitus Type II.

Relief was also given by the tribunal to another officer in the army’s Defence Security Corps who was denied disability pension despite suffering from “peripheral arterial occlusive disease in the right lower limb”.

The Centre had argued that the officers were on “peace posting” and their
disease was not attributable to or aggravated by their military service.

Noting that the onset of the disease in both cases was during the course of military service, the court said a mere statement that the officers were on peace posting was insufficient to discharge the onus on the Release Medical Board (RMB) to show that the disease was not attributable to the service.

It is common knowledge, the bench added, that diabetes could be caused and exacerbated by stressful living conditions and in case of a “peace posting”, the RMB had a greater responsibility to identify its cause and dissociate its onset from the military service of the claimant officer.

“...The mere fact that the onset of an ailment might have been while the officer was on
a peace posting does not
incontrovertibly indicate that the disease was not attributable to military service,” the court said.