London: Seven Gurkhas, who formerly served with the British Army, on February 21 lost the High Court battle against what they claimed "inferior" pay and treatment to that of their British colleagues because of their race and nationality.

Delivering the judgement in the High Court, justice Sullivan said the differences in pay and pensions between Gurkhas and British soldiers were not so great that they could be described as "disproportionate or irrational".

Gurkhas' pensions, he said, was twice the top rate of Indian Army pensions, with cost of living increases linked to those in Nepal, where the ex-soldiers had returned to live.

He said there were "no winners" and he hoped they would "be able to resolve their outstanding differences in a spirit of co-operation rather than conflict".

The Gurkhas were refused permission to appeal.

The Gurkhas had been trying to claim two million Pounds in compensation and had their claim succeeded, it could have opened floodgates to some 30,000 other former soldiers.

In the test cases, the Nepalese ex-soldiers claimed their human rights had been breached by the "irrational and discriminatory" attitude of the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

The Gurkhas were represented at the two-day hearing by the Prime Minister's wife Cherie Blair.

But the MoD argued there had been no breach of human rights Laws, and that too much time had elapsed between the time the men were serving and the case being brought.

Arguing their case, Blair told justice Mullivan there had been "systematic and institutionalised less favourable treatment of Gurkha soldiers… on the grounds of their race and nationality."

"On the one hand Gurkhas are acknowledged to be brave fighters, who have provided loyal service to the Crown for nearly 200 years… and even today serve in Kuwait," she said.

"But on the other hand, they are treated as different and inferior in relation to other parts of the British Army on terms and conditions of service," she said.

PTI