Seizure Disorder & Epilepsy Disability Pension in Armed Forces 2026: NANA, Medical Board Reasons, Broad-Banding & AFT Remedy

For the general framework, see our Armed Forces disability pension guide. For the wider legal test governing NANA opinions, see Attributable or Aggravated by Military Service: NANA and AFT Challenge.

1. What is the legal issue in a Seizure Disorder disability-pension claim?

The medical diagnosis and the pension entitlement are separate questions. A person may undeniably suffer from a Seizure Disorder or epilepsy, yet the pension dispute may turn on whether the disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service, what percentage has been assessed, whether the percentage is for life or temporary, and whether the governing rules permit broad-banding or other consequential relief.

The central legal questions usually are:

• Was any seizure disorder, epilepsy or neurological abnormality recorded at entry?
• How long did the individual serve in fit medical category before the first seizure?
• Did the Medical Board identify a specific non-service cause?
• Was the onset merely described as occurring at a peace station?
• Was there head injury, infection, metabolic cause, neurocysticercosis, high-altitude exposure or another identifiable factor?
• Did the board apply the correct Entitlement Rules and Guide to Medical Officers?
• Was the disability assessed at 20%, 30% or another percentage, and for what duration?

2. Delhi High Court, 12 January 2026: Ex LEM (P) Satish Kumar

The most important current authority is Union of India and Ors. v. Ex LEM (P) Satish Kumar, W.P.(C) 359/2026, decided by the Delhi High Court on 12 January 2026.

The respondent had enrolled in the Indian Navy in January 2006 and completed 15 years of qualifying service. His Release Medical Board assessed Generalised Seizure Disorder at 20% for life, but recorded the condition as Neither Attributable Nor Aggravated by military service because the onset occurred at INS Circars, Visakhapatnam, a peace station.

The Armed Forces Tribunal granted disability element at 20% for life and directed rounding to 50%. The Delhi High Court dismissed the Union’s challenge. It held that the mere fact that onset occurred at a peace station was insufficient, particularly where the Medical Board had not identified another cause for the disease and there was no disease noted at entry.

The High Court further reiterated that, under the 2008 Entitlement Rules as interpreted in the contemporary Delhi line of cases, a bare Medical Board conclusion is not enough: the administration must furnish cogent reasons and identify the cause other than military service where it seeks to deny entitlement.

Official Delhi High Court judgment: Union of India v. Ex LEM (P) Satish Kumar.

3. A consistent 2025 Delhi High Court line on Seizure Disorder

The January 2026 judgment did not arise in isolation. During 2025, the Delhi High Court decided several materially similar cases involving Seizure Disorder after lengthy service, and repeatedly upheld AFT relief.

These cases are important because they demonstrate a pattern: where Seizure Disorder emerges after long fit service and the RMB merely records peace-station onset or reproduces a generic GMO paragraph, the courts have required more.

4. Why “peace station” is not, by itself, a medical cause

Peace station is a service-location classification. It does not identify why a neurological disorder arose. In the recent Delhi cases, the courts have repeatedly criticised the use of peace-station onset as the sole basis for NANA where the Medical Board did not identify another causative factor.

That does not mean that every seizure arising in a peace station is attributable to service. It means that the medical conclusion must be reasoned. A properly supported neurological opinion based on an identified independent cause can stand on a very different footing from a one-line conclusion.

5. Epilepsy is also a condition that may escape detection at recruitment

A balanced article must recognise the contrary line of law. Epilepsy and relapsing disorders may not always be detectable during recruitment medical examination, especially where there is no prior history disclosed and symptoms occur intermittently.

This distinction was emphasised in Ex Cfn Narsingh Yadav v. Union of India and later applied in cases such as Raushan Kumar Singh. Therefore, one should not argue mechanically that “no epilepsy was recorded at entry, therefore it must be attributable to service.” The strength of the presumption depends on the governing rule set and the facts, including duration of service, medical history and reasons recorded by the specialists.

6. Counter-authority: Raushan Kumar Singh

In Ex Rect Raushan Kumar Singh v. Armed Forces Tribunal Regional Bench Lucknow & Ors., decided by the Allahabad High Court on 9 October 2023, the petitioner had been diagnosed with Primary Generalised Epilepsy within months of recruitment. He had joined the Army in April 2014 and was invalided out in January 2015. The Invaliding Medical Board assessed the disability at 20% for life but found it NANA.

The High Court upheld the denial. It considered the very short duration of service, specialist neurological opinion, the absence of severe or exceptional service stress, the peace-station nature of the posting and the fact that epilepsy may escape detection at recruitment.

This case is particularly useful because it shows the factual dividing line between short-service epilepsy with strong specialist evidence of non-service causation and long-service seizure disorder where no alternate cause is identified.

Read Ex Rect Raushan Kumar Singh v. AFT.

7. Seizure Disorder caused by Neurocysticercosis

Where seizures arise from neurocysticercosis or another identifiable infection, the causation question may be different from idiopathic or unexplained epilepsy. In such cases, the medical board should analyse the underlying disease, the likely time and mode of infection, whether service conditions contributed to exposure or aggravation, and whether the applicable rules treat that underlying cause as service connected.

A claimant should therefore avoid treating all “seizure disorder” cases as one category. The legal analysis should begin with the actual neurological diagnosis.

8. What Para 33 of GMO 2008 was used for in older cases

In several older-rule seizure cases, the Medical Board relied on Paragraph 33 of Chapter VI of the Guide to Medical Officers 2008. The recent Delhi judgments note that epilepsy can arise at different ages and may be idiopathic or associated with causes such as brain trauma, infection, metabolic conditions or hypoxic exposure. They also recognise that aggravation may become relevant in high-risk service environments.

The practical legal point is not that Para 33 automatically favours the claimant or the administration. It requires a condition-specific analysis. If the board relies on Para 33 to deny the claim, it should explain which part of that medical reasoning applies to the individual.

9. Long fit service: why it matters

Where the disease first appears after many years, a denial should ordinarily confront that chronology. The Medical Board should explain whether the disease is idiopathic, genetic, infective, metabolic, traumatic or otherwise unrelated to service, and why.

10. What makes a NANA seizure opinion vulnerable?

1. No seizure disorder or neurological abnormality was recorded at entry.
2. The person served for many years in fit medical category before onset.
3. The RMB merely states “onset in peace station”.
4. The board refers to GMO 2008 but does not identify the actual individual cause.
5. The Commanding Officer’s certificate records no negligence or misconduct.
6. There is no recorded family history or pre-service epilepsy.
7. There is no identified infection, trauma or metabolic condition explaining the seizure.
8. The appellate order simply repeats the RMB conclusion.
9. The disability is accepted at 20% or 30% for life but service connection is rejected without a reasoned bridge between the medical facts and the conclusion.

11. What can make a NANA opinion more defensible?

A NANA opinion may be stronger where the record identifies a specific and medically supported cause unrelated to military service. Examples may include a clearly documented pre-service history, an identified genetic or idiopathic neurological disorder supported by specialist opinion, neurocysticercosis or another infection with no service nexus, a metabolic disorder, or a very short period of service with no relevant duty stress and strong neurological evidence.

Courts do not substitute themselves for neurologists. They intervene where the medical reasoning is absent, formulaic, internally inconsistent or legally misapplied.

12. Percentage assessment: 20%, 30% and lifelong disability

The recent seizure-disorder cases frequently involve assessments of 20% or 30% for life. Once entitlement is established, the percentage becomes relevant to the quantum of disability element or impairment relief under the applicable framework.

The assessment should be read together with:

• frequency and type of seizures;
• anti-epileptic medication;
• neurological and EEG findings;
• functional restrictions;
• medical category;
• duration of assessment—temporary or for life.

13. Broad-banding: when 20% becomes 50%

In several 2025–26 Delhi High Court seizure cases, disability assessed at 20% for life was rounded to 50% under the broad-banding law applicable to those claims. A 30% assessment may likewise fall in the applicable 50% band, subject to the governing rules and category of release.

Broad-banding should be analysed only after entitlement is established. It cannot cure a valid NANA finding by itself.

For the latest Supreme Court position on broad-banding arrears, see Sgt Girish Kumar: Broad-Banding and Disability Pension Arrears.

14. ER 2008 versus ER 2023: the date must be checked first

The Ministry of Defence has stated that all death and disability reported or recorded after 21 September 2023 are governed by the Entitlement Rules 2023 and Guide to Medical Officers 2023. Therefore, the recent Delhi cases concerning personnel released under the older rule regime must not be copied mechanically into every new seizure-disorder claim.

Official DESW: ER 2023 and GMO 2023.

15. Disability Pension vs Impairment Relief under the current framework

Under the current terminology, personnel invalided or deemed invalided from service on qualifying medical grounds may fall within the Disability Pension framework, while personnel retained in service despite an attributable/aggravated disability may fall within the Impairment Relief framework, subject to the conditions of ER 2023.

The terminology matters because a current seizure case should be pleaded using the correct benefit and the correct medical board process.

16. Departmental appeal strategy

A First or Second Appeal against a NANA seizure finding should ordinarily address:

• entry medical record;
• first seizure date and circumstances;
• years of service before onset;
• neurology consultation and EEG/MRI findings;
• identified or absent causative factors;
• posting and duty history;
• whether the board treated peace station as conclusive;
• whether the board explained why the disease was considered idiopathic/constitutional;
• percentage and duration;
• applicable Entitlement Rules by date.

17. AFT challenge: practical grounds

18. Documents required

19. Frequently asked questions

Can Seizure Disorder be treated as attributable to military service?

Yes, depending on the applicable rules and facts. Recent Delhi High Court cases have upheld entitlement where the disorder arose after lengthy service and the Medical Board did not identify another cause.

Does onset in a peace station defeat the claim?

No, not by itself. Recent Delhi cases have repeatedly held that peace-station onset, without a reasoned causal analysis, is insufficient.

Can Primary Generalised Epilepsy still be NANA?

Yes. Epilepsy may escape detection at recruitment, and short-service cases supported by specialist neurological evidence may be treated differently. Raushan Kumar Singh is an example.

Can 20% seizure disability be rounded to 50%?

Where entitlement is otherwise established and the applicable broad-banding framework applies, recent cases have granted rounding from 20% to 50%.

What if the seizure disorder is due to neurocysticercosis?

The underlying infection and its service nexus must be analysed separately. The diagnosis “seizure disorder” alone does not decide attributability.

Does ER 2023 apply to current cases?

Yes, where the disability was reported or recorded after 21 September 2023. The precise current rules and GMO should be applied rather than relying solely on older judgments.

20. Key takeaway

The strongest seizure-disorder disability-pension cases are built around chronology and reasons. Long fit service followed by seizure onset, coupled with an RMB that merely says “peace station” or “NANA”, is materially different from primary epilepsy appearing within a few months of recruitment with strong specialist evidence of non-service causation.

The correct legal approach is therefore neither “all epilepsy is service related” nor “epilepsy is always constitutional”. The Medical Board must apply the correct rules to the individual neurological evidence and give a reasoned conclusion capable of scrutiny.