Disability Pension and Ex-Gratia Claim: Ex-Hav Ashok Kumar vs. Union of India

The case of Ex-Hav Ashok Kumar vs. Union of India revolved around the denial of ex-gratia compensation to a retired army personnel who was discharged due to medical reasons. The Supreme Court had to determine whether the petitioner, who was granted disability pension, was also entitled to ex-gratia compensation under the policy issued by the Ministry of Defence.

The appellant, Ex-Hav Ashok Kumar, served in the Indian Army for 24 years until December 2010 and was granted an additional two-year extension. During this extended tenure, he suffered a stroke and was medically re-categorized as SHAPE-3 (Permanent) with an 80% disability. The Medical Board found that his disability was not attributable to or aggravated by military service. He was subsequently discharged from service.

Arguments of the Petitioner

The appellant, represented by his legal counsel, contended:

“For all intents and purposes, the appellant was prematurely discontinued from service, which should be considered an invalidation. Therefore, he is entitled to ex-gratia compensation as per the policy circular dated 26 December 2011.”

The petitioners further argued:

• Since he was granted disability pension and his medical condition arose during the extended service period, he should be treated as having been invalidated from service.
• The policy issued by the Ministry of Defence on 26 December 2011 provides ex-gratia compensation for personnel who are disabled while performing official duties.
• Previous Supreme Court rulings, such as Union of India vs. Ram Avtar, have established that personnel granted disability pension should be entitled to rounding off benefits, reinforcing the claim for ex-gratia payment.

Arguments of the Respondent

The Union of India, represented by the Additional Solicitor General, opposed the claim, stating:

“The intent of the policy is not to grant ex-gratia compensation to every person who is eligible for disability pension. The appellant was not boarded out due to disability but was discharged after an extended tenure.”

The respondent further contended:

• The policy applies only to personnel who are disabled in the performance of their official duties and are boarded out of service due to such disability.
• Ex-Hav Ashok Kumar was not boarded out but discharged upon completion of his extended tenure, in accordance with Army Headquarters policy.
• If the policy intended to provide ex-gratia compensation to all individuals receiving disability pensions, it would have explicitly stated so.

Supreme Court’s Verdict

The Supreme Court, with Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Indira Banerjee presiding, ruled against the appellant, stating that he did not meet the eligibility criteria for ex-gratia compensation. The Court observed:

“The appellant was not boarded out of service due to a disability attributable to or aggravated by military service. The ex-gratia compensation policy applies only in such cases and not to those who complete their extended tenure and are subsequently discharged.”

The Court ruled:

• The petitioner was entitled to disability pension as per Regulation 173-A of the Pension Regulations, but this did not automatically qualify him for ex-gratia compensation.
• Regulation 173-A creates a deeming fiction for pension purposes but does not extend to ex-gratia claims.
• The ex-gratia policy specifically requires that the individual must be boarded out of service due to disability, which was not the case for the appellant.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

• Ex-gratia compensation under the Ministry of Defence policy is only available to personnel who are boarded out due to a service-related disability.
• Receiving a disability pension does not automatically entitle an individual to ex-gratia benefits.
• Army personnel serving extended tenures are subject to different discharge criteria, affecting their eligibility for special benefits.
• Judicial review ensures that claims for military service benefits are assessed strictly per government policies.

This ruling reinforces the principle that while military personnel are entitled to disability pensions in certain cases, ex-gratia benefits are granted only under specific conditions defined by government policies.

Petitioner Name: Ex-Hav Ashok Kumar.
Respondent Name: Union of India & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice Indira Banerjee.
Place Of Incident: India.
Judgment Date: 24-07-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Ex-Hav Ashok Kumar vs Union of India & Ors Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 24-07-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Pension and Gratuity
See all petitions in Public Sector Employees
See all petitions in Judgment by Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud
See all petitions in Judgment by Indira Banerjee
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments July 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category