Disability Pension In The Armed Forces: Legal Framework, Challenges, And Policy Reforms
- IJLLR Journal
- Sep 22
- 2 min read
Sneha Kaushik, B.B.A. LL.B., Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies
ABSTRACT
Disability pension is a vital component of social security for Armed Forces personnel, recognizing the physical and psychological hardships endured in service. Despite clear provisions under the Pension Regulations[1] and Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, serving and retired personnel, along with their dependents, are often forced to approach the Armed Forces Tribunal and higher courts to secure benefits that should be granted without dispute.
A series of recent judicial developments, including the dismissal of hundreds of appeals filed by the Ministry of Defence before the Delhi High Court and other High Courts, underscores the administrative inefficiencies and absence of a coherent policy in the implementation of disability pension. The government’s approach to disability pension claims remains deeply disheartening, as courts have repeatedly observed across numerous cases. In proceedings before the Delhi High Court, honourable Justice C. Hari Shankar dismissed several such matters in a single day and even cautioned that costs would be imposed if appeals against Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) orders were pressed further. The Court noted a recurring pattern in the government’s stance rather than granting pension already awarded by the AFT, the authorities persistently drag disabled personnel into prolonged litigation.
The law, as it stands today and as discussed further in this paper, clearly defines the conditions under which disability pension is to be granted. Yet, the government continues to adopt an adversarial posture, deploying senior counsel to treat these disputes as abstract questions of legal interpretation, often disregarding the human cost involved. It is unreasonable to expect that a soldier, who has dedicated a lifetime in service of the nation and has sustained physical or mental disability in the process, should be compelled to wage yet another battle in court following retirement or invalidation from service.
Where the government falters, the judiciary has stepped in to bridge the gap, ensuring that justice is not denied. However, the broader concern remains: what message does this send to the youth aspiring to join the armed forces if the state fails to honour even the most basic entitlements of those who sacrificed their health in service of the country?
