JUDGMENT : 1. In this petition filed under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act following reliefs are sought: (i) Quashing of the impugned order dated 11.12.2012 (Annexure A-11) and order dated 30.07.2015 (Annexure A-17) vide which the competent authority/respondents have rejected the initial claim of disability pension and the 'First Appeal' of the applicant. (ii) Issue order or direction to competent authority/respondents to grant/sanction disability pension to the applicant with effect from date of discharge. OR In the interest of justice this Hon'ble Bench may be pleased to decide the case on merit and accordingly issue direction to respondent for the release of disability pension, with arrears, from the date of discharge. (iii) Issue any other appropriate order of direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this application. 2. The factual matrix of the case may be noticed briefly. Petitioner was enrolled in JAKLI regiment of Indian Army on 28.8.1994. On 11.7.2010 the petitioner while serving in Operation Rakhshak met with an accident while on Annual leave. On 13.10.2010 he was placed in Low Medical Category A3 (Temp) for "FRACTURED RADIUS ULNA RT. (OPTD) WITH DISLOCATION RIGHT ELBOW (reduced)" by the Medical Board. Employability restrictions were imposed as per provisions of Army order. A Court of Inquiry followed. The said injury was declared not to be attributed to Military service. Subsequently petitioner was subjected to Re-categorisation Medical Board on 04.04.2011. His medical category was upgraded to A2. The Medical Board specified restrictions regarding employability. However, Unit assigned certain hard/strenuous duties to petitioner during Operation "Rakhshak". This led to deterioration of his condition. In April/May 2011 petitioner was deputed to High Altitude Uncongenial Area, Gurez Sector of Jammu & Kashmir. The representation against his posting was rejected. Petitioner, while posted in Gurez Sector developed further complicacies. On 15.8.2011 he appeared before a Re-categorisation Medical Board. His Medical category was upgraded to A2 (per). Employability restrictions were again imposed by the Medical Board, but the same were ignored by the concerned Authorities. On 9.5.2012 petitioner was brought before the Release Medical Board which opined that the disability was neither attributable nor aggravated by Military service. Finally he was discharged from service on 30.6.2012 after having served for 17 years 10 months and 02 days in low medical category A-2 (Per). On 9.5.2012 petitioner was brought before the Release Medical Board which opined that the disability was neither attributable nor aggravated by Military service. Finally he was discharged from service on 30.6.2012 after having served for 17 years 10 months and 02 days in low medical category A-2 (Per). Petitioner's claim for disability pension was rejected on the ground that the injury sustained was found to be neither attributable to nor aggravated by Military service. First appeal preferred by petitioner was rejected only after intervention of this Tribunal. Second appeal preferred by the petitioner has not been decided. The petitioner bases his claim for disability pension on the ground that his posting to Gurez sector in gross violation of expert medical advice, was arbitrary and led to aggravation of his disablement. Such aggravation ought to have been conceded by the respondents as per the medical guidelines as there was a casual connection between the disability and military service. Respondents have contested the petition. It is pleaded that the petitioner was transferred to Pension Establishment w.e.f. 30.6.2012 after rendering 17 years and 10 months of service being placed in low medical category A-2 (per) on account of fractured radius ulna(Rt) Elbow (reduced) and no shelter appointment was available in the unit. Service pension has been granted to the petitioner. At the time of his discharge petitioner was brought before the Release Medical Board which assessed his disability @ 30% for life and considered it neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. Petitioner was held not entitled for grant of disability pension. First appeal preferred by the petitioner came to be rejected. Second appeal preferred by him is still pending consideration before the competent authority. It is pleaded that the petitioner was discharged from service on 30.6.2012 under item III(hi)(e) of table annexed to Army Rule 13(3) being placed in low medical category A-2 (Per) and no shelter appointment was available in the unit. He was not entitled for disability pension as disability fractured ulna (Rt.) (reduced) (Optd) with dislocation (Rt.) Elbow (reduced) was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. It is further pleaded that Medical Board is the specialised authority based on expert medical doctors to give opinion regarding attributability and aggravation of the disability due to military service and the conditions of service resulting in the disablement of the individual. It is further pleaded that Medical Board is the specialised authority based on expert medical doctors to give opinion regarding attributability and aggravation of the disability due to military service and the conditions of service resulting in the disablement of the individual. It is denied that the petitioner was ever deployed to combat or any other duty restricted by the medical authorities. 3. In his replication petitioner has joined the issue by maintaining that the manifestation of orthopaedic complications and aggravation of sustained injury was perceptibly related to the conditions of military service. The orthopaedic complications were compounded as the petitioner was ordered to proceed to a forward post located at height of 14000 ft. on the line of control in Gurez sector, resulting in further aggravation of sustained injuries. Respondents ought to have conceded manifestation of orthopaedic complications to be attributable to conditions of military service and further aggravation of sustained injuries post surgery period as aggravated by military service. The Release Medical Board had conceded the attributability and aggravation of sustained injuries by conceding "presence of stiffness" in right elbow which employ on severally immobilised movements of affected ailments. 4. Heard learned counsel for parties and considered the matter. 5. It is not in controversy that petitioner sustained fracture Radius Ulna (Rt) (Optd) with dislocation (Rt) Elbow (Reduced) resulting in disability while he was on Annual leave. He had been enrolled in JAKLI Regiment on 28.8.1994 and was transferred to Pension Establishment w.e.f. 30.6.2012 after rendering 17 years and 10 months of service under Army Rule 13(3) being placed in Low Medical Category other than SHAPE-I i.e. A-2 (Per) as no shelter appointment was available in the unit. It is also not disputed that service pension has been granted to the petitioner in terms of PPO No. S/029433/2012, dated 5.6.2012. Petitioner's claim for disability pension has been rejected by respondents despite disability assessed @ 30% for life as respondents considered it as neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. First Appeal preferred against the rejection of disability element stands rejected whereas second appeal is still pending consideration. 6. Record of Medical Board, forming Annexure A-2 to the petition reveals that petitioner complained of pain in right fore-arm on lifting weight. There was restriction of elbow movements. First Appeal preferred against the rejection of disability element stands rejected whereas second appeal is still pending consideration. 6. Record of Medical Board, forming Annexure A-2 to the petition reveals that petitioner complained of pain in right fore-arm on lifting weight. There was restriction of elbow movements. Petitioner's case is that he was not excused any duty though, there were restrictions as per the Army Order 03/2001 as the petitioner was unfit for combat duties having been placed in category A-2 (Per), Reference is also made to finding of Release Medical Board dated 9.5.2012 forming Annexure A-8 to the petition which records stiffness in right elbow leading to recommendation of his release. It is claimed that initially there was pain only on lifting of weight which subsequently graduated to constant pain and movements of fore-arm got restricted. This according to petitioner, establishes aggravation of disability due to military service even though the same was remote. Since the asserted pain persisted and occasionally locking of elbow was witnessed, petitioner had to be excused Arms duty rendering petitioner unfit for combat duty. This established aggravation of disability conclusively and decisively. The medical record supports these findings. Thus casual nexus, even though remote, is established between the manifested medical complications and sustained injuries post surgery period with the conditions of military service. Had the competent authority considered the proceedings of all Medical Boards in the context of duties assigned to petitioner in counter insurgency operations "OP RAKSHAK" and in High altitude area in Gurez sector, his claim for disability might not have been rejected. The competent authority does not appear to have applied its mind to the medical record before it and appears to have failed to consider what led the petitioner to be declared unfit for combat duty. Given nature of disability and the manner and circumstances in which it got aggravated finally culminating in declaration of petitioner as unfit for combat duty leaves us with no option but to hold that the disability was aggravated by military service. This conclusion is strengthened by the statement of Commanding Officer at page No. 50 of OA, which brings it to fore that the petitioner was not spared/ excused any duty and he had to perform all routine duties including Guard duties which render the carrying and handling of Arms inevitable. This conclusion is strengthened by the statement of Commanding Officer at page No. 50 of OA, which brings it to fore that the petitioner was not spared/ excused any duty and he had to perform all routine duties including Guard duties which render the carrying and handling of Arms inevitable. Pain came into play due to lifting of weight with occasionally locking of elbow. As if it was not enough, petitioner was posted to High altitude area and his condition gradually started deteriorating. Resultantly his disability got aggravated due to rigors of military service. It cannot, therefore, be held that the disability in the instant case was by no means related to army service. The Medical Board failed to record its reasons that the disability was not aggravated by military service and in absence of such reasons denial of benefit of disability pension would be illegal and indefensible. This proposition of law is fortified by a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court titled Union of India vs. Manjeet Singh, dated 12.5.2015, 2015 AIR (SC) 2114. 7. In view of the foregoing discussion impugned orders dated 11.12.2002 and 30.7.2015 passed by respondents by virtue whereof the initial claim of petitioner for disability pension and his first appeal have been rejected, are quashed. Respondents are directed to sanction disability pension to petitioner w.e.f. the day of his discharge, work out the arrears and issue Corrigendum PPO and release the disability pension together with arrears from the date of discharge of petitioner within three months from the date of service of this order on respondents, failing which the arrears of disability pension will carry interest @ 8% from the date of discharge of petitioner. Accordingly the petition is disposed of. File be consigned to records after its due completion.