This case came up today for admission, and relates to an applicant who was enrolled in the Indian Army on 28.02.1995, and thereafter invalidated out from service on 13.08.1995, he being in a permanent medical category unsuitable for retention.
2. The applicant has come up before this Tribunal seeking the relief to treat his disability of “Schizophrenia” with the assessment of 30% of disability for life as attributable to or aggravated by military service. This he prays for since he claims this disability of “Schizophrenia” was caused due to weather conditions and should have been accepted as stress and strain of service, based on law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of Dharamvir Singh v. Union of India, (2013) 7 SCC 316 and Union of India v. Rajbir Singh, Civil Appeal No. 2904 dated 13.02.2015.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was enrolled as a recruit on 28.02.1995 and invalidated out from service with effect from 13.08.1995, having rendered only 5 months and 14 days military service. A perusal of the documents appended in this OA indicates, that the applicant a recruit, consequent to reporting for recruit training at Signal Centre in the Army, with two weeks of service was detected with “Schizophrenia” and while at the point of time when he joined the service post recruitment medical board, he was Shape-I, the disease in question manifested and was detected immediately after joining of his unit for training, at the Signal Centre at Goa. In Annexure A-2 which is the report on the individual, the following aspects clearly emerge:—
(i) His nature of duties at that stage within first few days did not involve severe stress and strain;
(ii) He was not on any special duties. He was only attending daily routine part of basic military training. During period of recruitment, these first couple of weeks is utilized for various kits issued as well as orientation. To the questions whether the disability was attributable, or aggravated by service, it has been stated that it was not attributable to service, and not aggravated, since the disability was detected immediately after joining the unit.
4. In the report on a case requiring psychiatric intervention, AFMS 10 at Annexure A-3, the following has been recorded:—
“Service - 2 years, age - 22 years, the individual was not doing any training, appeared disinterested, mentally unbalanced in isolation avoiding social contracts with other recruits and abnormal behavior while sleeping and eating”.
5. The medical report of the graded specialist is a detailed report. This recruit with two weeks of training was admitted to Military Hospital on 06.04.1995 with a history of abnormal behavior of 10 days duration. In his family history there was history of psychiatric illness in his elder brother recorded, and in the opinion the Specialist had said that the recruit was a case of “Schizophrenia” with symptoms manifesting within few days of starting of recruitment training and in view of the family history of psychiatric and his break down immediately on joining service, the patient was unlikely to stand and strain for further service. The disability was found by the Medical Board neither attributable nor aggravated by service. The opinion carried the statement, apart from a detailed opinion of the Specialist, the Board also recorded that it was a constitutional disorder not connected with service. The percentage of disability was assessed at 30% for two years.”
6. In consideration of the OA as well as arguments of the counsels, together with earlier orders by this Tribunal on similar issues, it has been clearly held that any order for a disability (disease and not injury), to be held as either attributable or aggravated by service, the individual has to in fact serve a definitive period with the services to allow the disease to manifest as either attributable or aggravated. It has also been held in various orders that diseases of psychiatric nature, cannot be detected at the time of recruitment, due to the range of tests being undertaken during this recruitment. Consequently a disease such as “Schizophrenia” being detected immediately on commencement of training with the individual not having done more than two weeks' of training, cannot be reasonably, assessed to be either attributable or aggravated by service. In this regard, the detailed opinion of the psychiatric together with the opinion of the Board cannot be faulted. An individual who has not even come to grips with the actual training of the service and immediately on arrival displays such abnormal behavior as recorded in his OC/CO's opinion, as well as by the Specialist and Board, cannot be deemed to have got the disease due to its attribution to service, no aggravation in this case is possible since the individual ceased to attend training immediately after the first two introductory weeks. Balance of service was spent between various Hospitals being evaluated and finally being invalidated out.
7. The counsel for the applicant has sought to place a reliance on various judgments from which he seeks to draw strength. These being AFT (PB) order in OA 90/2014 dated 25.09.2014 and judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases of Dharamvir Singh (supra), Tarsem Singh v. Union of India and Rajvir Singh (supra).
8. The Tribunal would like to distinguish these judgments based on their specific ratios as follow:—
9. OA 90/2014 — In this case the applicant was detected with “Schizophrenia” after 13 months of completion of training and the Tribunal had recorded that there was no opinion that had recorded a prior predisposition to this disease, and there was no reasoned medical opinion in that case. Based on the 13 months of service, which indeed involved rigorous training, the Tribunal had considered that in the absence of any medical opinion, there was every probability of presumption in favour of the petitioner and with such a duration of training aggravation in any case could well occur.
10. Dharamvir Singh v. UOI — has observed that the Disability is ‘attributable to or aggravated by military service’ to be determined under the “Entitlement Rules for Casuality Pensionary Award 1982” as shown in Appendix-II, the Government of India, Ministry of Defence letter No. 1(1)/81/D(Pen-C) dated 20.06.1996 and “General Rules of Guide to Medical Officer (Military Pensions) 2002. Rule 423 deals with “Attributability to Service”.
11. The ratio above clearly lays down that while a member is presumed to be in sound physical and mental condition upon entering service and is subsequently being discharged on medical grounds, in determination for health the disability is to be presumed due to service unless a reasoned medical opinion holds to the contrary. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in examination of Entitlement Rules also interpreted Rules 5 and 14. The import of this judgment is that for denial of disability to an individual who is detached from service, the respondents are duty bound to record a detailed or significant medical opinion making it evident why such disability is not attributable or aggravated by military service.
12. In the present case under consideration, we find that there is a detailed medical opinion recording such findings. Further we cannot ignore the fact that the individual has only done two weeks' of initial, non-strenuous basic training.
13. Rajvir Singh's case— Counsel for the applicant took us to para 5 whereby he claimed that similar diseases had been allowed to various applicants by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
14. A perusal of those cases is indicative of the fact except where mentioned specifically (recruit), all other cases pertain to people who had served varying period in the armed forces, prior to being invalidated out. In the cases of the recruits recorded in this order, no case of “Schizophrenia” has been recorded. As such the specific ratio of this judgment does not apply to the case in hand.
15. In addition the Tribunal would like to refer to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Gnr. Laxmanram Poonia (Dead) through LRs v. Union of India, JT 2017 (2) SC 536. This once again pertains to a case of “Schizophrenia” with psychiatric disorder. The medical opinion had held that the disease was constitutional in nature and not connected with military service, there being no causal connection. In this judgment, however, the appellant had been enrolled on 14.09.2005 and had a history of medical treatment for “Schizophrenia” with frequent break downs in health, leading to his invalidation on 07.10.2009. Here once again it is clear that in the circumstances of such a case with protracted service, together with frequent break downs and medical interventions, undoubtedly an opinion such as being constitutional in nature cannot hold the field. There was also complete absence of previous history. Consequently Hon'ble Supreme Court of India while considering the law on the issue had held that in a case like this, where the medical board had not given any reason to support its opinion, the individual must be given the presumption and benefit of doubt and consequently disability pension was allowed.
16. In the case in hand, once again not only there is two weeks of service, but there is also a detailed medical opinion clearly stating why such disease to an individual was not attributable or aggravated by service.
17. We have examined the import of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, and the Tribunal orders to distinguish this case, so that it is evident on the specific facts of the case in hand that viewed on its own merits, as well as in light of the law, in this case no justification exists for being admitted both on facts and law. It consequently deserves to be dismissed.
18. Accordingly the O.A. is dismissed in limine.
19. Learned counsel for the applicant has made an oral request for grant of leave to appeal under Section 31 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. We find no question of law of general public importance involved in the matter to grant leave to appeal. Hence, the request for leave to appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court is declined.
Comments