A view of the Delhi High Court in New Delhi. | Photo credit: Sushil Kumar Verma
The Delhi High Court has held that merely describing primary hypertension as a lifestyle disorder is not enough to deny a retired Indian Air Force (IAF) officer disability pension.
A Bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet PS Arora said that lifestyle varied from individual to individual and the medical board was bound to give reasons for its conclusion after properly examining the individual.
The court issued the order while rejecting the Centre’s challenge against the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal which held that the IAF officer was entitled to disability pension for primary hypertension.
“It is to be noted that the lifestyle differs for each individual. Thus, a mere declaration that the disease is a lifestyle disorder cannot be a sufficient reason to deny the grant of disability pension unless the medical board has properly checked and recorded the data relevant to the individual concerned,” the Bench said in its judgment issued on January 19.
“We believe that given the facts of this case, the conclusion reached by the tribunal cannot be faulted. The groundless petition is dismissed,” he ruled.
37 years of service in IAF
The officer joined the Air Force in October 1981 and was discharged in March 2019 after completing 37 years, five months and four days of service.
The center opposed the award of disability pension for hypertension, arguing that the officer suffered a peacetime disability for reasons that could not be attributed to or aggravated by military service.
It was submitted that as per the findings of the medical board, the officer’s hypertension was an “idiopathic lifestyle-related disorder”.
The court observed in the judgment that it was a recognized case that the officer was not suffering from any disability at the time of his appointment to the IAF.
She further stated that the medical board did not provide any reasons to support its conclusion that the primary hypertension disability was unrelated to military service. The court added that the board also failed to provide any reasons why hypertension was a disability.
“The position of the law is clear in this regard, that there is an obligation on the part of the medical commission to justify the conclusion, therefore the medical commission must record the reasons and findings when fulfilling the burden imposed on it,” the court said.
Published – 22 Jan 2026 16:38 IST
