Manner of discharge from service irrelevant in considering benefits to war disabled soldiers: Punjab & Haryana High Court (India)

In a detailed judgment, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that the manner of exit from service of a war disabled soldier (invalidation, discharge, retirement, voluntary retirement, completion of terms of engagement etc) would not be of any relevance while determining benefits or facilities related to the disability suffered by him.

In the matter before the High Court, the State of Punjab had refused to extend the “honour and gratitude” scheme to the son of a soldier disabled to the extent of 80% in an anti-terror operation. The scheme provides for compassionate employment to one child of soldiers disabled or killed in action. The refusal was on the pretext that the disabled soldier was not discharged from the Indian Army on medical grounds but continued to serve the military after getting disabled and was released from service with 80% disability on competition of his terms of engagement.

Relying upon existing case-law, the Court held that it would be discriminatory to refuse the benefit of the scheme on such a ground.

The Court observed:

"The procedure for invalidment being in place, the decision whereof vested with the authorities and the continuation of the petitioner in service, despite having suffered disability, rather goes to his credit while the same has been construed otherwise, appals this Court.....On cumulative consideration of the matter, it stands unequivocally established that the claim of the petitioner is both legally sustainable and substantively justified, due to legislative intent behind the policy, when harmoniously construed with fairness and equity, precludes a rigid or hyper-technical interpretation that would undermine its very essence, while judicial precedents, serving as guiding beacons, affirm that the nature of discharge cannot be wielded as an instrument to deny legitimate entitlements, thereby binding the respondents by the principles of justice and the imperatives of settled law to extend the benefits envisioned under the policy in a manner that upholds both its letter and spirit."

More details, and the judgment can be accessed from Verdictum.