Central Administrative Tribunal - Jaipur
J.P. Sharma vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 24 March, 2004
Equivalent citations: 2005(1)SLJ212(CAT)
ORDER J.K. Kaushik, Member (J)
1. In this case a question of seminal significance is involved and we are called upon to decide as to whether an Ex-District Judge who has held subsequent assignment/employment in the Central Government would be entitled for the facilities provided by the Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS, for brevity).
2. The factual panorama of this case in a nut-shell is that the applicant retired from the post of District Judge on 30.4.1997. He was appointed to the post of Judicial Member, Central Administrative Tribunal at Chennai Bench and subsequently came to be posted at Allahabad where he served upto 30.4.1998. The applicant was against appointed as Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court at Jaipur and joined on the post on 1.5,1998. He continued on the post of Presiding Office upto 2.4.2002 till his retirement on attaining the age of superannuation.
3. The applicant was allowed to avail Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS, for brevity) facilities at Chennai and Allahabad when he was holding the office of Judicial Member, Central Administrative Tribunal. He continued to enjoy the same facilities at Jaipur during his continuation on the post of Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court at Jaipur. But after his retirement, the said facilities have been stopped. He submitted a representation dated 3.4.2002 to the local authorities under CGH Scheme. It is further averred that the post of Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court is a Central Government Post and created by Labour Ministry of Government of India and all facilities of post owned by the Central Government as per terms and conditions of appointment are admissible to retired judicial officers. The facilities made available to the pensioners under CGHS have been narrated in Para 4.3 of the original application. A reference has been made to O.M. dated 17.12.1990 indicating that officers who are eligible to enjoy CGHS facility while in service, are eligible to enjoy them after retirement also. There has been lot of correspondence in the matter but no action has so far been taken by the respondents.
4. The original application has been filed on numerous grounds mentioned in Para 5 and its sub-paras of the original application. The non-extending medical facilities to the applicant being a retired employee of Central Government through CGHS is said to be unreasonable, arbitrary and offends of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The applicant is said to have served with terms and conditions applicable to Central Government and denial of the requisite medical facilities is said to be not at all justified. A ground of discrimination has been pleaded.
5. The respondents have contested the case and have resisted the claim of the applicant. A brief history of the case has been narrated. It has been averred that the applicant belongs to the cadre of District Judge who retired from the State Government and has no cause of action worth the name. CGHS facilities were provided to the retired Judges of Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts as per the specific orders whereas the applicant has retired as a District Judge. His retirement cadre is District Judge. The answering-respondents are bound to provide CGHS facilities as per Government of India orders and as per the orders, the applicant is not entitled for the said facilities. The applicant is not a Central Government pensioner so as to be entitled for medical facilities under CGHS. He was appointed as Presiding Officer in Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court at Jaipur on re-employment basis and while in service, the benefits have been extended to him under the rules applicable to the Central Government servants including the medical facilities. However such benefits were restricted to that period of his service and after his relinquishment of the office the same ceased to exist. There is no condition in the appointment of retired judicial officer that after completion of their tenure, they are to be treated as retired Central Government Pensioners. The grounds raised in the original application have been generally refuted.
6. A short rejoinder has been filed on behalf of the applicant and the averments have been developed primarily on the basis of Annexure R/1, wherein it has been provided that Ex-Members of Parliament are entitled to get the benefits under CGHS even if they are not in receipt of any pension and the same facilities cannot been denied to the applicant.
7. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the records and pleadings of the case.
8. The learned Counsel for the applicant has reiterated facts and grounds raised in the O.A. and has made us to travel through the various documents especially the terms and conditions of appointment of retired judicial officer as Presiding Officer of Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court and has drawn our attention that the medical concession is to be regulated under the rules applicable to Central Government employees. He has also invited our attention to the circular at Annexure A/4 and has submitted that the applicant is a Central Government pensioner and he is fully entitled to get the benefit under CGHS. He has next contended that he has been enjoying such benefits during his period of service as Judicial Member, Central Administrative Tribunal as well as the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, at Jaipur and the same cannot be denied now after his retirement. It was also contended that these facilities are to be extended to Central Government servant as well as Central Government pensioners and it is not necessary that one must be getting pension from the Central Government. He submitted that as per the rules in force, the applicant could not get the pension for the post of Judicial Member, Central Administrative Tribunal, since he did not completed two years minimum qualifying service necessary for grant of pension. As regards the post of Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, the Scheme of CPF was in vogue and only of the pensionary benefits he enjoyed the benefit of CPF Scheme and therefore he has to be considered as a Central Government Pensioner and would be entitled for the CGHS facilities.
9. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the respondents has also reiterated the defence of the respondents as set out in the reply. Certain written arguments have also been submitted on behalf of the respondents almost repeating the arguments as well as the pleadings made in the reply. An endeavour has been made to persuade us that the applicant was allowed medical facilities under CGHS while he was serving as Judicial Member, CAT, at Chennai arid Allahabad i.e. in outside Rajasthan State since he could not have enjoyed the benefit of medical facilities admissible to a retired District Judge in the State. While working as Presiding Officer Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court at Jaipur he was also allowed the said benefit since the terms and conditions as applicable to the Central Government servant were applicable to him on his re-employment. But basically, he belongs to the cadre of District Judge of the State of Rajasthan and the medical facility is available to the State employees, could be enjoyed by him. In this view of the matter, the applicant cannot enjoy the benefits in question. It has also been next contended that the benefits available to a Supreme Court/High Court Judge or to a Member of Parliament for which a specific orders have been issued, cannot be allowed to him since there is no specific order to this effect. Thus, the claim of the applicant is misconceived and the applicant has not been able to make out even prima facie case for interference by this Tribunal. The original application deserves to be dismissed with costs.
10. We have considered the rival contentions raised on behalf of both the parties. The material facts are not in dispute. There is no dispute that the applicant served as District Judge in State of Rajasthan and retired in the year 1997. There is no dispute that he served as Judicial Member, Central Administrative Tribunal at Chennai and Allahabad for a period of less than 2 years and did not qualify for pension. It is not in dispute that he served as Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court at Jaipur during the period from 1.5.1998 to 2.4.2002 and was allowed the Central Provident Fund facilities and was not paid the normal pension. The inference would be that per se he is not a Central Government Pensioner. We also find from the perusal of the circulars at Annexure R/1 that these are specific circulars meant for specified categories and the case of the applicant is not covered under the same. However, we find that as per the terms and conditions of the applicant at Annexure A/2. medical concession was to be regulated under the rules as applicable under the Central Government Employees and the same is applicable to retired Judicial Officers. This position has not been refuted in the reply to Para 4.3 of the original application. Thus, there seems to be no justification in denying the benefits of medical facilities under CGHS to the applicant.
11. The matter being of a great significance and having a far reaching effect, we carried out an incisive analysis. We find it expedient that to appreciate the complete Central Government Health Scheme, Paras 1 and 2 of the Scheme as published in Chapter 36 of Establishment and Administration for Central Government Offices by Muthuswamy and Brinda, 7th Edition are relevant and are extracted as under:
CHAPTER 36 Central Government Health Scheme
1. General-This Scheme was introduced in Delhi on 1st July, 1954, with a view (i) to provide comprehensive Medical Care facilities to the Central Government employees and members of their family and also (ii) to do away with the expensive system of reimbursement of medical expenses. The scope of this social security scheme is being regularly widened inasmuch as it now stands extended to Ahmedabad, Allahabad, Bangalore, Mumbai, Calcutta, New Delhi/Delhi, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Jabalpur, Kanpur, Lucknow, Chennai, Meerut, Nagpur, Noida, Patna and Pune.
2. Extent and Application-The Scheme applies to the following main categories of persons:
(i) Central Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries, MPs and their families;
(ii) Central Government servants paid from Civil Estimates (other than those employed in Railway Services and those employed under Delhi Administration) having their Headquarters in the cities under the Scheme and their families;
(iii) Members of Delhi Police Force and their families in Delhi/New Delhi.
(iv) Civilian Government servants paid from Defence Service Estimates and having their headquarters in the areas covered by CGHS.
(v) Central Government servants already in receipt of benefits under the Scheme, on deputation to semi-Government and autonomous bodies, either financed by the Central Government or receiving substantial Central Government grants, and their families, during deputation in the areas covered by the scheme;
(vi) Families of Central Government servants when on temporary transfer (being less than 6 months) outside the cities covered by the Scheme;
(vii) Central Government servants and families actually receiving treatment under the Scheme at the time of retirement, up to one month after actual retirement;
(viii) Central Government pensioners including those retiring with CP Fund benefits and their families. Also All India Service pensioners (irrespective of the fact as to whether they retire from Centre or State), Central Government pensioners' widows getting family pension, children drawing pension after the Central Government servants' death (including children's wives).
Central Government pensioners (except Railway and Defence) will have the option to get their names registered with any of the dispensaries in a city where CGHS is functioning irrespective of whether they are residing in that city or not subject to the following conditions:
(i) They will neither be entitled for any domiciliary visits if they are residing in an area beyond a radius of 3 km of the dispensary nor will they be entitled for any travel expenses.
(ii) They will not be eligible to be attached with any VIP dispensary or heavy loaded dispensaries.
Such pensioners during the period of their short visits to other cities, can avail the medical facility in the CGHS dispensary situated in those cities after obtaining a temporary permit from the DD/CMO concerned.
(ix) Retired employees of the Ordnance Factories in the cities where the CGHS facilities exist. They are entitled to the same facilities as admissible to other Central Government retired pensioners covered by the CGHS Scheme.
(G.I., Min. of Health and F.W., O.M. No. B-12014/2/89-CGHS (P), dated the 20th September, 1991).
(x) Ex-Governors and Ex-Vice-Presidents and their wives/windows and minor children.
(xi) Members of the Staff Side of the National/Departmental Council.
(xiii) Eligible members of the family of the deceased Ex-Members of Parliament on payment of contribution at the same rates at which it was being paid by Ex-MPs.
(G.I., M.H. and F.W. No. S-11011/5/90-CGHS (P) dated the 7th May, 1991)".
12. From a bare perusal of the aforesaid, we find that item No. 2 (viii) specifies that the Central Government Pensioner including those retiring with CPF benefits and their families are covered under the scheme. There is no iota of doubt that the applicant retired with CPF benefits from the post of Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, at Jaipur, from a Central Government organisation and therefore his case is fully covered under the Central Government Health Scheme.
13. The inescapable conclusion would be that the submissions of the learned Counsel for the respondents cannot have our concurrence and therefore the denial of the medical facilities under Central Government Health Scheme to the applicant can safely be construed as unjustified, arbitrary and untenable in the eyes of law.
14. We also do not find any force in the submissions of the learned Counsel for the respondents that the applicant was granted the benefits of medical facilities under CGHS when he was outside the State of Rajasthan and that becomes a plea of volte-face inasmuch as while working as Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court at Jaipur also he has been allowed the benefit under the said Scheme.
15. The upshot of the aforesaid discussions is that there is ample merit and substance in this original application and the same stands allowed. The respondents are directed to extend the medical facilities to the applicant and his eligible family members on fulfilling the requisite formalities to become the member of CGHS e.g. payment of contribution etc., as admissible to retired employees of Central Government, forthwith. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs.