Armed Forces Tribunal Rules Against Disability Pension for Home Injury
The Armed Forces Tribunal has delivered a significant ruling concerning disability benefits for military personnel. The tribunal determined that a soldier who sustained injuries while preparing for duty at his residence does not qualify for a disability pension. This decision came after a detailed hearing involving a retired Air Force officer.
Case Details and Tribunal's Rationale
Former honorary flying officer Vindeshwari Prajapati filed an application challenging the denial of his disability pension. Prajapati served in the Indian Air Force for nearly thirty-eight years before retiring in June 2023. The incident in question occurred in January 2010 at his home in Bhopal.
While hurrying to get ready for duty, Prajapati checked the water level in his overhead tank. He fell on a hard floor during this activity, suffering serious injuries. Medical authorities later diagnosed him with compression fractures of the thoracic vertebrae. They assessed his permanent disability at twenty percent for life.
The regional bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal in Lucknow heard the case. Justice Anil Kumar served as the judicial member, while Vice-Admiral Atul Kumar Jain acted as the administrative member. After considering all arguments, the bench dismissed Prajapati's application.
Key Arguments from Both Sides
The applicant argued that his injury happened while he was effectively on duty. He maintained that his disability was aggravated by his service conditions. Prajapati cited various Supreme Court and tribunal rulings to support his claim for the disability element of his pension.
The central government contested this plea vigorously. Government representatives submitted that the injury occurred during a purely personal activity at home. They emphasized that the accident lacked any direct or indirect connection with Air Force duties.
Tribunal's Final Observations
The tribunal held that merely being in service or preparing for duty does not automatically establish attributability for pension purposes. The bench observed that checking a household water tank constitutes a private activity completely unrelated to military obligations.
The activity involved risks common to civilian life rather than risks inherent to military service, the tribunal noted. It concluded that the rejection of the disability pension claim was legally justified since the injury bore no connection to Air Force duties.
This ruling clarifies the boundaries between service-related injuries and personal accidents for military personnel seeking disability benefits.
