Pre-2006 voluntary Armed Forces retirees to get disability pension

In an important move, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) today issued formal orders authorizing disability pension to all disabled-soldiers and officers prior to 2006, even to those who had taken pre-voluntary pre-mature retirement. Doing away with the rule that the disability pension was given only to those officers and soldiers who had sought pre-mature retirement prior to 2006. While sources said that there were multiple judicial pronouncement, the government has finally given to a long pending demand and "has been a welcome step."

Sources said that while the orders came in May itself, it has been implemented only now.

A letter accessed by India Today says "the President is pleased to decide that Pre-2006 Armed force personnel who were retired/discharged from service on or after 1st January 2006. Who were retained in service despite disability and retired voluntarily or otherwise will be disallowed disability elements in addition to retiring/service pension and gratuity subject to condition that their disability was accepted as attributable to or aggravated by military service and had forgone lump-sump compensation in lieu of disability."

Time line:

In 2004, the Delhi High Court had questioned the MoD rule that prohibited grant of disability and war injury benefits to premature retirees. Similar orders were passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court and later upheld by the SC.

In 2009, the MoD issued a letter authorising disability benefits to voluntary retirees but had restricted its applicability to only post-2006 retirees. The MoD, however, continued to refuse benefits to affected disabled personnel, except those who approached courts.

In November 2015, a committee of experts constituted by then Defence Minister, Manohar Parrikar, to reduce litigation in the armed forces came down heavily on the MoD for indulging in filing frivolous appeals against its employees, including disabled soldiers.

The panel specifically recommended the removal of the prohibition once it had been struck down by courts. The committee stated that the denial of benefits was based upon a "false foundation, wrong inputs and unethical propaganda".