On February 20, 2019, the Defence Ministry made an announcement that briefly revived hope among India’s ex-servicemen community. Via its official Twitter handle, the Ministry promised the withdrawal of 60 civil appeals filed in the Supreme Court against disabled soldiers’ rightful pension claims. The move, presented as a compassionate gesture “keeping in mind the welfare of ex-servicemen and their families,” was welcomed enthusiastically by veterans as a step towards reducing the distress caused by lengthy and often unnecessary legal battles.
Yet, nearly six years later, optimism has given way to frustration and disenchantment. The issue was brought sharply back into the public eye recently when Trinamool Congress MP Sagarika Ghose questioned in Parliament why the Defence Ministry continues to litigate against disabled veterans’ pension claims despite clear judicial directives discouraging such action.
The MP further highlighted persistent operational failures in the SPARSH pension portal, whose ongoing technical glitches have only compounded the daily hardships of pensioners. Her pointed queries emphasise an uncomfortable truth: these assurances have not translated into meaningful relief for veterans, mainly due to the indifference and procedural rigidity of the bureaucracy.
This raises critical questions: why does India’s military bureaucracy remain committed to needless litigation against disabled veterans, and where does accountability lie for prolonging their suffering?
Judicial Warnings Ignored
 Over the past decade, the Supreme Court has repeatedly expressed frustration and outright anger at the Ministry of Defence’s continued litigation against settled disability pension cases. The landmark judgment in Union of India vs. Pirthwi Singh (2018) remains illustrative of this troubling pattern. Authored by Justice Madan B Lokur, the apex court criticised the Defence Ministry’s “could n’t-care-less” attitude, labelling the litigation approach as “insouciant” and explicitly frivolous. The judgment even imposed a fine of ₹1 lakh on the Ministry, emphasising the severity of the court’s displeasure.
Yet, instead of internalising these harsh judicial rebukes, the Ministry’s bureaucracy persisted in its established patterns. Another Supreme Court judgment from March 2022 (Union of India vs. Piyush Bahuguna) reiterated the judiciary’s disappointment, dismissing yet another frivolous appeal by the Ministry and explicitly condemning its habit of challenging settled cases. The judiciary’s message is loud and unequivocal: the bureaucratic practice of pursuing frivolous cases must stop immediately. Yet, despite such clear directives, the military bureaucracy remains unmoved, demonstrating negligence and deliberate indifference.
Contradictions Within Policy
India has had a comprehensive National Litigation Policy in place since 2010. Its core tenets emphasise that the government must behave as a responsible litigant, avoid frivolous appeals, respect settled judicial positions, and refrain from litigation solely to harass or exhaust citizens. Sadly, the current bureaucratic approach towards ex-servicemen contradicts these clearly articulated guidelines.
While senior political leadership and policymakers repeatedly express solidarity and sympathy with veterans, these sentiments fail to trickle down into actionable bureaucratic practices. A pronounced dissonance exists between publicly declared policy objectives and on-ground bureaucratic execution, severely eroding trust among our veteran community. Rather than an occasional administrative lapse, repeated filings indicate a deeper systemic failure, where policies are openly disregarded and bureaucratic accountability remains absent.
SPARSH: A Digital Dream-Turned Nightmare
We, as veterans, face another painful hurdle amid this bureaucratic chaos—the System for Pension Administration Raksha (SPARSH). Conceived to streamline, simplify, and speed up pension payments, SPARSH has instead amplified bureaucratic inefficiency and multiplied veterans’ hardships.
Designed to simplify pension administration through digitisation, SPARSH was expected to eliminate red tape. Instead, it has ironically introduced additional layers of complexity. Ex-servicemen are routinely facing severe disruptions, such as sudden stoppages of pensions without explanation, abrupt rejection of legitimate documents, and prolonged delays in receiving pensions—leading to financial distress and emotional trauma.
Such systemic malfunctions are devastating to a veteran dependent on timely financial support. A pension is not just money; it’s dignity, security, and respect earned after years of sacrifice. Subjecting those who served the nation to such indignities is unjustifiable and morally indefensible.
The Human Cost
Each bureaucratic misstep, every flimsy appeal filed, and every delayed pension directly translates into suffering for genuine individuals and their families. Disabled soldiers, often dealing with debilitating physical injuries or psychological trauma from service, find themselves facing an insurmountable bureaucratic maze.
Many of our fellow veterans are elderly and unable to travel frequently to distant tribunals and courts. This constant bureaucratic harassment takes an enormous emotional toll, undermining their mental and physical health. The humiliation and anxiety they experience due to administrative neglect compounds the suffering caused by their disabilities.
Moreover, the financial implications are dire. Delayed or denied pensions force families into financial hardships, pushing them toward debt, limiting access to medical care, or affecting educational opportunities for their children. These are costs seldom accounted for by an indifferent administrative apparatus.
Systemic Accountability: Who Is to Blame?
The root cause of this tragedy is bureaucratic inertia coupled with a troubling culture of impunity. Bureaucrats filing repeated frivolous appeals suffer no personal consequence, nor do they face accountability for ignoring judicial directives and government policies.
In the Pirthwi Singh (2018) judgment, the Supreme Court specifically criticised the Defence Ministry’s hiring of multiple senior advocates, including an Additional Solicitor General, to contest an issue already settled by judicial precedent—at considerable taxpayer expense. The court rightly questioned this misuse of resources, but the questions remain unanswered within the bureaucratic corridors.
The Defence Ministry bureaucracy continues with costly misadventures, secure in the knowledge that individual accountability mechanisms remain weak or nonexistent. This encourages a culture of litigation without consequence, severely harming veterans in the process.
Path to Reform: Urgent and Immediate Steps
Rectifying this grave issue requires decisive and urgent action. India’s veterans do not seek charity or favours. They demand respect, dignity, and rightful adherence to judicial pronouncements and government policies.
First, the Defence Ministry must immediately cease filing appeals against settled pension matters. Senior officials must issue clear internal guidelines directing compliance with judicial orders and the National Litigation Policy. Bureaucrats defying these directions must face administrative consequences, creating accountability where none currently exists.
Secondly, the SPARSH platform requires an immediate systemic audit and corrective measures. The Defence Ministry must engage proactively with veterans’ organisations and technology experts to swiftly address identified glitches. Human oversight with sensitivity toward veterans’ concerns should complement technological solutions to ensure genuine service improvement.
Finally, a cultural shift within India’s defence administration is urgently needed beyond specific technical and legal measures. The Ministry must embrace a value-based administrative approach that prioritises dignity, sensitivity, and fairness for veterans, rather than treating them merely as file numbers.
Honouring Our Soldiers’ Sacrifices
Veterans have dedicated their lives to protecting this nation’s integrity and honour, often paying heavy physical and psychological prices for their service. In return, they ask only for dignity, fairness, and sensitivity—promises India frequently makes but rarely delivers through its bureaucratic structures.
The continued bureaucratic indifference towards veterans’ welfare contradicts both declared national policy and repeated judicial instructions, reflecting a troubling disconnect between intent and execution. Immediate course correction through strict internal accountability measures, systemic improvements to SPARSH, and meaningful cultural reform in the bureaucracy are non-negotiable.
Six long years after promising relief from needless litigation, India’s disabled soldiers deserve more than empty assurances and bureaucratic insensitivity. They deserve tangible administrative reforms and respect. It is time we repaid their sacrifices, not merely in words but through clear, compassionate, and effective action.