Supreme Court orders Centre to grant war injury pension to Kargil soldier

The Supreme Court on Wednesday has directed the Central Government to pay 'war injury pension' to retired Indian Army soldier Narendra Kumar. Narendra Kumar developed a disease called 'Rheumatoid Arthritis' while he was deployed in Kargil. The Supreme Court observed that the Government cannot interpret its policy in a manner that is contrary to its explicit written details or leads to unreasonable and discriminatory outcomes.

A bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe dismissed the appeal filed by the Central Government against previous orders of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) and the High Court. The previous orders had directed that Kumar be granted war injury pension instead of disability pension.

Narendra Kumar joined the Army in 1996. He was diagnosed with this disease during his deployment in Kargil under 'Operation Rakshak' between 2003 to 2005. After retiring in 2013, he was receiving disability pension, due to which he approached the AFT. Kumar cited the Ministry of Defence's 2001 policy letter, which covers disabilities occurring during operations specifically notified by the Government.

The AFT had allowed Kumar's claim in April 2024, stating that the illness occurred during deployment in Kargil. The High Court also upheld this decision in August 2025. However, the Central Government argued in the Supreme Court that the 2001 policy letter is only for specifically notified operations such as 'Operation Sindoor' or 'Operation Snow Leopard', and does not cover operations like 'Operation Rakshak' running in Jammu-Kashmir.

The Government also argued that if Kumar's interpretation of the policy letter is accepted, every soldier deployed in Jammu-Kashmir will benefit from it. But the Supreme Court rejected this argument. The Court said that category E(i) of the policy is intended to provide the Government with the facility to cover war-like situations. The Court further stated that when the words of a policy are not limited, it is not the job of the Court to limit its application, especially when it pertains to pension benefits.

The Court has told the Government to be clear in the future that when an operation is notified, it should declare in clear words which pension benefits will apply to whom. The Court also suggested the Ministry of Defence to frame comprehensive and clear rules for the administration of services so that fairness is maintained.