Thursday, 23, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

UNION OF INDIA vs. WING COMMANDER S.P.RATHORE
2019 Latest Caselaw 1247 SC

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 1247 SC
Judgement Date : 11 Dec 2019

    
   SC Pdf Link
Headnote :

A. According to the Defence Service Regulations Pension Regulations for the Air Force, 1961, specifically Regulations 37(a) and (b), a disability pension is not granted for disabilities rated below 20%. Since the disability in question is less than 20% and was aggravated by service in the Air Force, the order granting the disability pension is hereby annulled.



[Para 9]



B. Regarding disability pensions, if an individual has a disability rating of less than 20%, they are not eligible for a disability pension, and therefore, the issue of rounding off does not arise.



[Para 9]

 

Before :- Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ.

Civil Appeal No.10870 of 2018. D/d. 11.12.2019.

Union of India & Ors. - Appellants

Versus

Wing Commander S.P.Rathore - Respondents

For the Appellants :- Ms. V.Mohana, Sr.Adv., R. Balasubramanian, Sr. Adv., Pranay Ranjan, Santosh Kr. Vishwakarma, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocates.

For the Respondents :- Mohan Kumar, Ms. Rashmi Singh, Ms. Ritu Bhardwaj, Ms. Neetu Singh, Ramesh Chandra, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

Deepak Gupta, J. - 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 Regulations 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 retirement 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 assessed 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:-

Percentage of disability as assessed by invaliding medical board

 

Percentage to be reckoned 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 that 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 which deals with officials of Armed Forces invalided out under circumstances mentioned in Para 4.1 would be entitled to rounding of the disability. 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. v. 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 applicable even to those who superannuated under Para 8.2. The Court did not deal with the issue of entitlement to disability pension 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 house. 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 application filed by the Respondent before the AFT shall stand dismissed.

The appeal is allowed accordingly.

Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter