Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 13731/2024, CM APPL. 57490/2024
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. N.K. Aggarwal, Sr. PC
Through: Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Jagdish Chandra, CGSC
Mritunjay Air Force (Legal Cell)
Through: Mr. Ajit Kakkar and Mr. Aman Kumar, Advs.
Ms. Deepika Sheoran and Mr. Baljeet Singh, Advs.
Through: Ms. Radhika Bishwajit Dubey, CGSC
Through: Mr. Piyush Gupta CGSC
Sgt Mritunjay Air Force (Legal Cell)
Through:
Through:
Through: Sgt Manish Kumar Singh and
Through:
Through: Mr. Raghvendra Shukla Sr. PC for UOI
Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta and Ms. Esha Mehrotra, Advs.
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Theepa Murugesan, Sr. PC
Through: Mr. Baljeet Singh and Mr. A.K.
Chaudhary, Advs.
Through: Ms. Seema Gulati, Sr. PC
Through: Mr. Baljeet Singh and Mr. A.K.
Chaudhary, Advs.
Through: Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain, Sr. PC
Through: Mr. Ajai Bhalla and Ms. Aditi Laxman, Advs.
Through: Mr. Shubham Mahajan, Sr. PC for UOI
Through: Mr. Shiv Ram Singh, Mr. Girindra Kumar Pathak and Mr. Hem Kumar, Advs.
Through: Mr. Tatsat Shukla and Mr. Ram Jivan Dixit, Advs.
Through: Mr. Sushil Kumar Pandey, Sr.
PC
Through: Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Dhaka, Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Mr. Sumit Sharma and Ms. Arti Kumar, Advs.
UNION OF INDIA ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Ms. Archana Sharma, Sr. PC EX MWO SHYAM SINGH .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Deepika Sheoran and Mr. Baljeet Singh, Advs.
Through: Mr. Vineet Dhanda, CGSC for UOI
Through: Ms. Deepika Sheoran and Mr. Baljeet Singh, Advs.
Through: Mr. P.S. Singh, CGSC
Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta and Ms. Esha Mehrotra, Advs.
Through: Mr. Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, Sr.
PC
Through:
Through: Mr. Ravi Kant Srivastava, Sr.
PC
Singh and Sgt Mritunjay Air Force (Legal Cell)
Through: Mr. Devendra Kumar, Mr. Raj Kumar and Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Advs.
Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, CGSC
Force (Legal Cell)
Through: Mr. Kritendra Tiwari, Adv.
Through: Ms. Suruchi Mittal, Sr. PC
EX SUB SHAMSHER SINGH .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Devendra Kumar, Mr. Raj Kumar and Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Advs.
Through: Mr. Jitesh Vikram Srivastava, Sr. PC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
JUDGMENT
05.08.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
1. These writ petitions deal with the entitlement of the respondents to disability pension. The Union of India assails decisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal, whereby disability pension stands granted to the respondents.
2. These cases stand covered by as on date more than eighty judgments passed by this Bench as well as by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. They also stand covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Dharamvir Singh v UOI[1] as well as the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Vijender Singh v UOI[2].
3. Against one of these decisions, which was rendered by us in UOI v Ex Sub Gawas Anil Madso[3], an SLP has been preferred before the Supreme Court in which notice alone has been issued and no interim orders have been passed.
4. We are not informed that any SLP has been preferred against any of the other matters passed by this Bench or the Coordinate Bench.
5. Learned Counsel for the Union of India in all these matters fairly acknowledged that the controversy stands covered by the above decisions.
6. In its recent decision in Union Territory of Ladakh v Jammu & Kashmir National Conference[4], the Supreme Court has deprecated the practice of hierarchically lower Courts including the High Courts keeping matters pending merely because some issue is pending before the Supreme Court. Even where the correctness of a judgment has been doubted by the Supreme Court, the decision in Jammu & Kashmir National Conference directs High Courts to implement the law as it stands and not to adjourn matters awaiting the outcome of the appeals in the Supreme Court.
7. We have taken stock of this judgment in para 60 of the judgment in Gawas Anil Madso.
8. We, therefore, proceed to decide these writ petitions on the basis of the decisions taken by this Court.
9. A tabular statement of the position as it emerges in all these writ petitions, including the decisions by which the individual writ petitions, may be provided thus: S No WP(C) No. Name of Respondent Disability Years of service Reasoning given by the RMB
1. W.P.(C) 13731/2024 Ex SGT Babu Lal Yadav Central Retinal Vein Occlusion (Left Eye)
33 Onset of disability on Oct 2012 at peace station Sirsa. It is associated with hypertension & hyper-viscosity syndrome in leukaemia and polycythaemia vera. The vision of right eye have improved. No stress and strain of service. Hence, NANA as per para 24( d) (ii) GMO
2008.
2. W.P.(C) 804/2025 Ex MWO HFO Kailash Chand i. Diabetes Type-II ii.Primary Hypertension
3. W.P.(C) 821/2025 HFO Retd. Hradyesh Kumar Varshney i. Diabetes Type-II iii. Coronary Artery Disease 37 Life Style Disease, Onset of disability white in peace. No delay in diagnosis/ treatment of indl. No close time connection with HAA/Cl Ops/Fd area as per Para 26 and 43 of Ch VI of GMO 2008 and charter of duties dt. 22 January 2015.
4. W.P.(C) 824/2025 Ex WO Sadananda Rautaray 633050 R Diabetes Type-II
36 Life Style Disease, onset on May 2010 while in peace area. No delay in diagnosis/treatment of individual. connection-HAA/ CIOps /Fd Area as per Para 26 of Ch VI of GMO 2008.
5. W.P.(C) 990/2025 Ex SGT Mukesh Kumar Pandey Primary
20 Onset of disease in peace area at New Delhi. No· history of infection, service-related trauma/close time association with stress of Fd/HAA/ ClOps service. Hence NANA as per para 43 of GMO 2008.
6. W.P.(C) 1019/2025 Ex MWO Vijender Singh Teotia Central Serous Chorioretinop -athy Right Eye
38 Disease-progressed without any link to service conditions/ stress and no evidence of delay or adverse factors, is deemed NANA as per para 24(d)(i)
7. W.P.(C) 1031/2025 HFL Narayanasa my Nammalwar (Retd.) Primary
8. W.P.(C) 1277/2025 SGT Pinaki Choudhary (Retd.) Primary
23 Life style disease. Onset on February 2016 in peace area. connection with- HAA/ ClOps/Fd area as per Para 43 of Ch VI of GMO 2008.
9. W.P.(C) 1279/2025 EX MWO HFL Amrit Lal Sekhri ECG Abnormality (LBBB)
10. W.P.(C) 1468/2025 GP Capt. Vinay Sareen i.Diabetes Mellitus Type II iii.Dyslipidae -mia
11. W.P.(C) 1472/2025 EX WO Surendra Kumar Singh Primary
37 Life style disorder. in peace-area (Allahabad). diagnosis and there was no stress/strain of service Hence, NANA as per Para 43 of Ch VI of GMO 2008.
12. W.P.(C) 1707/2025 EX MWO Bijay Kumar Sah CAD AWMI 37 No service related trauma/stress or delay in diagnosis or treatment. The condition is held neither attributable by service as per Para 47 of Chapter VI of GMO 2008 and Charter of Duties dated 16 January 2014.
13. W.P.(C) 1724/2025 EX NC E Ratan Lal Das Mellitus Type II
14. W.P.(C) 1725/2025 EX MWO Shyam Singh Primary
15. W.P.(C) 1885/2025 EX WO Dubey Awdhash Mellitus Type II
37 Life Style Disease, onset on February 2016 of in peace Narayan area. No close time area as per Paras 26 and 43 of Ch VI
16. W.P.(C) 1907/2025 HFO Ramanand Saini i.Pulmonary Thrombo Embolism with Pulmonary
37 Onset on Oct 2009 while posted to Peace area. An idiopathic disorder and no delay in diagnosis. There is no close time association with stress or strain of service. Hence NANA.
17. W.P.(C) 1986/2025 EX SGT Anil Kumar CAD ASMI 20 Onset on 13 November 2003 in peace area. No service related trauma/stress or delay in diagnosis or treatment. The condition is held neither attributable by service.
18. W.P.(C) 2011/2025 JWO Madan Lal Kaushik Primary
19. W.P.(C) 2093/2025 EX SGT Somnath Pal Primary
20. W.P.(C) 2524/2025 EX Sub Shamsheer Singh Primary
21. W.P.(C) 2732/2025 EX SGT Akhilesh Kumar Mishra Primary
10. These appeals stand covered, in identical circumstances, by several decisions rendered by this Court, in which disability pension was denied on identical grounds. Some of the representative decisions may be cited thus:
(i) Primary Hypertension
(c) UOI v SGT Harvinder Singh Negi[7]
(d) UOI v Koutharapu Srinivasa[8]
(ii) Diabetes Mellitus Type II
(c) UOI v Sayan Panja13
(d) UOI v Rajesh Kumar14
(iii) Coronary Artery Disease
(c) UOI v EX JWO Vinay Rathee19
(d) UOI V EX JWO SK Srivastava20
(iv) Primary Hypertension with Retinopathy
(v) Diabetes Mellitus Type II and Primary Hypertension
(c) UOI v CDR Sudesh Kumar Sharma24
(d) UOI v GP Capt Girish Kumar Johri (Retd)25
11. The reasons for our disinclination to interfere with the decision of the Tribunal are forthcoming in the individual judgements passed by us, and we do not deem it necessary to burden this order by a reiteration thereof. Suffice it to state that learned Counsel for the UOI, in these petitions, too, was unable to urge that these cases are not covered by our earlier decisions. In fact, as already noted, they fairly conceded that the issues stood covered.
12. Following the aforesaid, all these writ petitions are dismissed. The petitioners are directed to implement the orders passed by the Tribunal within a period of eight weeks from today.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J. AUGUST 5, 2025