Disability Pension: Presumption In Favour Of Personnel If Found Fit At Enrollment; Percentage Must Be Rounded Off: Punjab & Haryana HC

"Once at the time of enrolment, respondent No.1 was medically examined and was found to be fit in all aspects and it was only during his service period that respondent No.1 was found to be suffering from disability... the said disability has to be attributed to the military service and the unsubstantiated report of Medical Board cannot take away the right." Punjab & Haryana High Court has reaffirmed that any disability contracted by Armed Forces personnel during their service period must be presumed as attributable to or aggravated by military service if they were found fit at the time of enrollment.

A bench comprising Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Amarinder Singh Grewal dismissed a petition filed by the Union of India, observing that the benefit of "rounding off" of disability percentage is a settled entitlement for all categories of retired personnel.

The primary question before the court was whether a disability diagnosed at the time of discharge can be denied pensionary benefits if the Medical Board deems it non-attributable to service, despite the personnel being fit at entry. The court also considered whether the respondent was entitled to the benefit of rounding off his disability percentage from 30% to 50% for life.

Presumption Of Service Attributability For Diseases Contracted During Tenure

The court noted that the respondent had served for three decades and was medically fit at the time of joining the Armed Forces in 1991. The bench emphasized that as per the settled law in Dharamvir Singh vs. Union of India and others (2013) 7 SCC 316, if no note of a disease was recorded at the time of enrolment, any subsequent disease is presumed to be service-connected.

This presumption in favour of the personnel emerges from Rules 5 and 9 of the ‘Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982’. The court observed that it is incumbent upon the Medical Board to provide specific reasons if they wish to conclude that a disease could not have been detected at the time of enrollment, failing which their opinion is considered a non-application of mind.

Medical Board Must Record Reasons To Overcome Presumption Of Fitness

Relying on the Dharamvir Singh precedent, the court highlighted that the Pension Sanctioning Authority cannot mechanically reject a claim based on a Medical Board report that lacks reasoning. In the absence of evidence showing the respondent suffered from the condition or a hereditary ailment at the time of joining, it must be presumed that the deterioration in health occurred due to service conditions.

The bench reiterated that under Rule 423(a) of the General Rules, it is immaterial whether the cause of disability occurred in a peace station or a field service area. The court found that the "unsubstantiated report" of the Medical Board could not override the legal presumption of attributability when the personnel entered service in sound physical and mental condition.

"The said disability has to be attributed to the military service and the unsubstantiated report of Medical Board cannot take away the right of respondent No.1 to claim the benefit of disability pension."

Entitlement To Rounding Off Of Disability Pension Percentage

Regarding the Union’s grievance against the rounding off of the disability element from 30% to 50%, the High Court held that this issue is no longer res integra. The bench cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India and others vs. Ram Avtar (2014), which clarified that all Armed Forces personnel are entitled to rounding off, regardless of whether they were invalidated out or retired on superannuation.

The court further noted that this position has been recently reinforced by the Apex Court in Union of India and others vs. Reet MP Singh (2025) and Bijender Singh vs. Union of India and others (2025). The bench remarked that the counsel for the petitioners could not dispute these settled propositions of law which mandate that a 30% disability must be rounded off to 50% for life.

Court Finds No Perversity In Tribunal’s Order

Concluding the matter, the bench found that the Union of India failed to point out any perversity in the AFT’s original order. The court held that the facts of the case, coupled with the established legal principles, left no room for interference. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed, upholding the respondent's right to the disability pension and the benefit of rounding off.

The ruling serves as a stern reminder that the "Entitlement Rules" provide a protective shield to veterans, ensuring that the burden of proof lies on the State to disprove service-connection for ailments arising during a long military career. By dismissing the Union's challenge, the court secured the terminal benefits of a senior officer who had dedicated 30 years to national service.

Date of Decision: July 01, 2026