1. The applicant through the medium of the instant Original Application is seeking the following reliefs:-
a) Quash and set aside the impugned letters dated 07.11.2016.
b) Direct respondents to grant disability pension @ 50% and also rounding off the same from @ 50% to @ 75% for life to the applicant
with effect from 01 Dec. 2013. i.e., the date of discharge from service with interest @ 12% p.a. till final payment is made.
C) Any other relief which the Hon ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was enrolled in Indian Air Force on 27.11.1973 on fulfilling the conditions of his enrolment. At the time
of superannuation from service on 30 11.2013, the Release Medical Board (RMB) assessed his disabilities ""(i) CAD(unstable Angina) PICA
SVD+LAD post PTCA with Stent to LAD(old) @ 30% (ii) Primary Hypertension @ 30% for life and composite assessment of both the disabilities
was 50% for life but opined the disabilities to be neither attributable to nor aggravated (NANA) by military service The representation made by the
applicant against rejection of disability pension was rejected by the respondents vide their letter dated 07.11.2016. Hence the present 0 A
3 Learned counsel for the applicant pleaded that at the time of enrolment, he was found to be fully fit and there is no note in the service documents
that he was suffering from any disease at the time of enrolment in Army. The diseases of the applicant were contracted during the service, hence it is
attributable to and aggravated by Military service. He pleaded that various Benches of Armed Forces Tribunal have granted disability pension in
similar cases, as such the applicant be granted disability pension as well as arrears thereof.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents contended that disability of the applicant ""(i) CAD(unstable Angina) PICA SVD+LAD post
PICA with Stent to LAD(old) @ 30% (ii) Primary Hypertension @ 30% for life and composite assessment of both the disabilities was 50% for life
but opined the disabilities to be neither attributable to nor aggravated (NANA) by military service. hence his claim for grant of disability pension has
rightly been rejected. He pleaded for dismissal of the OA.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant as also learned counsel for the respondents. We have also gone through the Release Medical
Board proceedings. The only question which needs to be answered is straight and simple, i.e., whether the disabilities of applicant are attributable to or
aggravated by military service?
6. The law on attributability of disability pension has been settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharamvir Singh Vs. Union of India and
Ors. (2013) 7 SCC 316. In this case, the Apex Court took note of the provisions of the Pensions Regulations, Entitlement Rules and the General Rules
of Guidance to Medical Officers to sum up the legal position emerging from the same.
7. In view of the settled position of law on attributability, we have noticed that the RMB has denied attributability on two grounds. The first ground is
that the disease was not connected with service and the second ground was that the onset of disease was at a peace station. However, we have
noted that the opinion enclosed with RMB of Specialist Medical Officer, i.e . Colonel R. Girish Senior Advisor, Cardiology & Medicine, has opined
that the applicant is a Reformed smoker. It is the normal practice that smokers give up smoking only after onset of heart disease. In this case we have
tried to understand the impact of smoking on health We have noted that it is established beyond doubt in medical literature that smoking increases the
chances of not only heart disease but also various other diseases. hence, cigarette packets have to carry a mandatory warning on its health hazard
Additionally, the medical literature is full of evidence that people who smoke are 2 to 4 times more likely to get heart diseases. The disability of the
applicant is heart related. Thus. considering the totality of circumstances, we are of the opinion that we have no valid reason to give benefit of doubt to
applicant and interfere with the opinion of medical board.
8. In this context we would like to quote the opinion of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1837/2009 titled Union of India & Another vs. Ex.
Rfn Ravinder Kumar, the Hon'ble Apex Court vide its order dated 23.05.2012 had stated that:-
Opinion of the Medical Board should be given primacy in deciding cases of disability pension and the court should not grant such pension
brushing aside the opinion of the Medical Authorities, record the specific finding to the effect that the disability was neither attributable to
nor aggravated by military service, the court should not ignore such a finding for the reason that Medical Board is specialized authority
composed of expert medical doctors and it is the final authority to give opinion regarding attributability and aggravation of the disability
due to military service and the conditions of service resulting in disablement of the individual"",
9. Additionally, we would also like to quote the opinion of Hon'ble Supreme Court on the expertise of Medical Board in Civil Appeal No 7672 of 2019
in Ex. Cfn Narsingh Yadav vs. Union of India & Ors. as under:-
21. Though, the opinion of the Medical Board is subject to judicial review but the Courts are not possessed of expertise to dispute such
report unless there is strong medical evidence on record to dispute the opinion of the Medical Board which may warrant the constitution of
the Review Medical Board.
10. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that we have no valid reasons to interfere with the opinion of the RMB which has declared both the
heart diseases of applicant as NANA.
11. Accordingly, the Original Application No. 313 of 2017 is liable to be dismissed and is dismissed.
12. Pending MA, if any, shall also stands disposed off.
13. No order as to costs.
