Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
Tushar Ranjan Swain vs East Coast Railway on 26 August, 2025
1 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025
Reserved on 25.08.2025 Pronounced on 26.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE SHRI SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J)
THE HON'BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A)
Tushar Ranjan Swain, aged about 44 years, Son of
Ramesh Chandra Swain, at present working as
SSE/Electrical TRD/TMKA/ECOR under Khurda
Road Division, resident of Near RI Office, Andilo,
Balianta, Bhubaneswar, Dist.- Khurda-752101,
Odisha.
......Applicant
VERSUS
1. Union of India, represented through the General
Manager, E.Co.Rly., Rail Sadan,
Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist.-Khurda-
751017.
2. Principal Chief Medical Director, Central Hospital,
East Coast Railway, Mancheswar, Bhubaneswar-
751017, Dist.-Khurda.
3. Divisional Railway Manager, East Coast Railway,
Khurda Road Division, At/P.O.- Jatni, Dist.-
Khurda-752050.
4. Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Coast
Railway, Khurda Road Division, At/P.O. Jatni, Dist.
Khurda-752050.
5. Chief Medical Superintendent, East Coast
Railway, Divisional Railway Hospital, Khurda
RAVI KUMAR
2025.08.26 10:07:49
+05'30'
2 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025
Road Division, At/P.O.- Jatni, Dist.- Khurda-
752050.
6. Chief Medical Superintendent, East Coast
Railway, Divisional Railway Hospital, Waltier
Division, Dondaparthy, Andhra Pradesh-830004.
......Respondents
For the applicant : Mr. N.R.Routray, Counsel
For the respondents : Mr. A.K.Rath, Counsel
O R D E R
PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):
It is the case of the Applicant that after being selected, he joined as SSE (Elect)/TRD on 23.10.2010. Subsequently, because of his illness of suffering from Schizo Affective Mood Disorder, he was treated at different hospitals and, thereafter, in enclosing the medical reports of Divisional Railway Hospital, Khurda Road and SUM Hospital, Bhubaneswar, he requested the authorities concerned to refer him for examination to any government psychiatric hospital preferably AIIMS. He was referred to Chief Medical Superintendent Khurda Road, Jatni for evaluation and opinion regarding his fitness for duty, who, upon examination reported in letter dated 08.08.2024 that he may be made fit for duty with remarks that "patient is mental normal at present, but complaining of excess sleep. His insite and RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 3 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 judgment adequate. He complaints of desire to learn others." Thereafter, he submitted repeated representations for providing him alternative appointment which did not yield any result, he approached this Bench in OA No. 663 of 2024 which was finally disposed of on 11.02.2025.
2. Further case of the Applicant is that after the order of this Bench, he was allowed to discharge the duty w.e.f. 10.03.2025 till 07.04.2025 on which date he was released to attend the medical board. The applicant reported before CMS/WAT on 08.04.2025 and remained as an indoor patient at the Waltair Divisional Railway Hospital. On 16/17.04.2025 (A/12), he was referred to HoD/Professor, Govt. of Mental Hospital, Visakhapatnam with remark that "the above named patient is a case of ? Bipolar Disorder (suspected) is being referred to you for opinion after thorough examination and opinion sent in confidential note to the above address" and, as per the direction, during the stay at Hospital, on 24.04.2025 he also appeared before the Medical Board. However, after being discharged from the hospital on 26.04.2025, he submitted the said discharge certificate through application dated 29.04.2025 RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 4 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 before the Chief Medical Superintendent, Khurda (Resp. No.5) but no response. Thereafter, his mother submitted representation on 19.05.2025 requesting to communicate the report of the Medical Board held on 24.04.2025. Since, nothing was intimated to him, applicant submitted representation on 21.05.2025 requesting the DRM, E.Co.Rly, KUR to issue necessary order to CMS/KUR to take decision on medical report of DRH/WAT and supply him the copy thereof. According to applicant, it is in the above circumstances, he filed this OA seeking to declare him medically unfit for the post of SSE/Elect/TRD and, consequently, direct the respondents to provide alternate appointment according to his medical fitness and further to regularize the entire period as duty for all purposes and release arrear salary.
3. The case of the Respondents both in counter as also in course of hearing is that applicant was admitted in Divisional Railway Hospital/WAT on 08.04.2025 and discharged on 26.04.2025 with an advice to attend Divisional Railway Hospital/WAT for review after one month. On 10.05.2025, he reported to Chief Medical RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 5 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 Superintendent, Khurda Road and he was advised to attend before Dr. P.K.Das, Additional Chief Medical Superintendent, Khurda on 13.05.2025, to receive a referral letter to Divisional Railway Hospital/WAT for review. Finally, he attended Divisional Railway Hospital, Khurda Road and received a referral letter to Chief Medical Superintendent, WAT, for his review at DRH/WAT on 29.05.2025. The Principal Chief Medical Director, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar instructed for constitution of Medical Board co-opted with a Psychiatrist as Member preferably from Govt. Hospital/Medical College to finalize applicant's fitness. Since applicant did not attend DRH/WAT, a letter was sent to him to attend DRH/WAT at the earliest, which was received by him on 09.06.2025. On query, the CMS/WAT in his letter dated 20.06.2025 informed that the applicant did not report the DRH/WAT. It is submitted that as the suffering complaint by the applicant requires long observation under qualified doctor(s) unless he attends DRH/WAT and cooperates with the doctor, no action is possible in declaring him medically unfit or otherwise but despite due advise that his case would be reviewed after one month, he did not report to the medical authority and, thus, RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 6 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 the stand taken by the applicant is under misconception and has no legs to stand in the eyes of law. Hence, respondents have prayed that this OA being devoid of any merit is liable to be dismissed.
4. We have considered the matter in its entirety with diligence. We find that earlier the Applicant approached this Bench in OA No. 663 of 2024 with prayer to direct the Respondents to refer him to AIIMS, BBSR for reassessment of his fitness and to direct the Respondents to provide him alternate appointment taking into account his physical condition for the post having no life risk and to pay him salary for the entire period by way of grant of leave after quashing the decision dated 08.08.2024 under Annexure-A/7 (sic). The said OA was disposed of on 11.02.2025 with observation and direction as under:
"5. The applicant prays to quash the medical report dated 08.08.2024 finding the applicant fit to join duty with observation that "patient is mental normal at present, but complaining of excess sleep. His insite and judgment adequate. He complaints of desire to learn others". In the counter the word "learn" written in the report has been referred as "harm" and stated that the observation made in the report is not enough ground to make the applicant either under sick list or to declare him medically unfit for his post. Be that as it may, this Tribunal lack any competency to quash the report RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 7 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 given by the medical authorities. Hence, this prayer of the applicant is rejected.
6. The applicant has also sought direction to the respondents to provide him alternate appointment taking into account his physical condition in the post having no life risk, we find that this relief can only be considered by the respondents based on the medical report finding the applicant medically unfit. Since, the applicant is medically unfit is yet to reach the finality, the above prayer is also cannot be granted at this stage.
7. Insofar as direction to respondents to refer him to AIIMS, Bhubaneswar for reassessment of his fitness is concerned, it may be noted that on perusal of record it is seen that the applicant has undergone psychiatric treatment at Railway and SUM Hospital. It is beyond the power of this Tribunal to declare him as medical fit or otherwise. The applicant is stated to have been suffering from "Schizo Affective Mood Disorder", which he has substantiated by the reports of the Railway as well as SUM Hospitals. It appears that the Railway authority referred the applicant to Chief Medical Superintendent for evaluation and opinion regarding his fitness for duty. The Chief Medical Superintendent in letter dated 08.08.2024 reported that "the patient is mental normal at present, but complaining of excess sleep. His insite and judgment adequate. He complains of desire to harm others". According to Ld. Counsel for the applicant, based on the letter dated 08.08.2024, if applicant is posted anywhere including railway tracks, high voltage cables and other sites, it will be adverse effect to his life and life of the other staffs due to mismanagement of power block. The Railway deals with public life and any type of mismanagement certainly will have cascading effect on the life of the passengers travelling in the trains. We have come across with a set of rules governing the field relating to medical examination for assessment of suitability etc. of an employee. Therefore, for the ends RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 8 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 of justice, it will be appropriate to direct the respondents to get the applicant examined either through AIIMS, Bhubaneswar or through duly constituted Medical Board in the Railway Hospital before his induction to his normal duty attached to his post preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, respondents may consider giving alternate light duty to the applicant. Ordered accordingly."
5. It is the stand of the applicant that after the order of this Bench as above, he was allowed to discharge the duty w.e.f. 10.03.2025 till 07.04.2025 on which date he was released to attend the medical board. The applicant reported before CMS/WAT on 08.04.2025 and remained as an indoor patient. From the report dated 16/17.04.2025 (A/12), it appears that the applicant was referred to HoD/Professor, Govt. of Mental Hospital, Visakhapatnam with remark that "the above named patient is a case of ? Bipolar Disorder (suspected) is being referred to you for opinion after thorough examination and opinion sent in confidential note to the above address". It is the case of the applicant in paragraph 4.13 of the OA that "during the stay at hospital, he appeared before the Medical Board on 24.04.2025 and the Medical Board upon examination sent report to Divisional Medical Authorities, Khurda Road". In paragraph 2 of the counter, RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 9 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 respondents have stated that "the stand taken in paragraph 4.13 is matter of fact and nothing is admitted beyond that". From the discharge certificate of E.Co.Rly, Waltair Division, placed at Annexure-A/13 of the OA, it appears that he was discharged from the hospital on 26.04.2025 with remarks as under:
"Final diagnosis- Bipolar disorder. Clinical summery- Presented is of Bipolar disorder attended for medical board. Evaluated and Reviewed at govt. Mental Hospital and advised fro conservative management and R/A (......) Hence being discharged. Advise on discharge-
......
Review after 1 month/SOS Review at Khurda CMS for further disposal."
6. It is the case of the applicant that after being discharged from hospital, WAT on 26.04.2025, on 29.04.2025 he submitted application along with discharge certificate before the Chief Medical Superintendent, Khurda (Resp. No.5) but no response. In the counter it is the case of the Respondents that the applicant reported before Chief Medical Supdt. KUR on 10.05.2025. Later, he was advised to attend before Dr. P.K.Das, Additional Chief Medical Superintendent KUR on 13.05.2025 to receive a referral letter to DRH/WAT for RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 10 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 review. He did not attend. However, on several contact over phone, finally he attended at DRH, KUR on 29.05.2025 when he was given the letter to attend DRG/WAT for review his illness. Thereafter, instead of reporting at the CMS/WAT, he filed the instant OA seeking this Tribunal to declare him medically unfit for the post of SSE/Elect/TRD and, consequently, direct the respondents to provide alternate appointment according to his medical fitness and to regularize the entire period as duty for all purposes and release arrear salary.
7. As per the statutory provisions of Railway, medically unfit of railway servants is classified into two categories viz., those who completely disabled for further service in any post in Railway and those disabled/incapacitated for further service in the post they are holding, but declared fit in a lower medical category and eligible for retention in service with lower medical standards. The Medical Board concerning experts would not only examine the Govt. servant but also ascertain the nature of disease/injury and also record a decision as to whether the said personnel is to be fit for particular RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 11 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 category of job. Based on such report, the authority concerned to take further necessary action in terms of the Rules. No such evidence has been filed by the Applicant declaring him medically unfit. The Applicant has sought this Tribunal to declare him medically unfit which is beyond the scope and ambit of this Bench to do so otherwise a floodgate will be opened for the similar cases seeking similar direction in all such cases. Hence, the first prayer of the Applicant is hereby rejected. In so far as the second prayer of the applicant to direct the Respondents to provide him alternate appointment is concerned, it may be recorded that this prayer is no more available for the applicant to seek in this second round of original application in view of the our earlier order holding that the direction to provide him alternative appointment can only be considered by the Respondents based on the medical report finding him medically unfit but the applicant is yet to declare medically unfit by the authority concerned. Hence, this prayer as also third prayer of the applicant in this OA being consequential is also not tenable in law.
8. The applicant, in paragraph 4.14 of the OA, has stated that on 29.04.2025 he submitted application along with medical discharge RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 12 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 certificate before the respondent No.5. On receipt of a telephonic message on 09.05.2025, he appeared before respondent No.5 on 10.05.2025 at about 10.00 AM. He was advised to come on 13.05.2025. He again reported before respondent No.5 on 13.05.2025 on 10 AM and remained there till 7 PM without any check up or advise. The office of respondent No.5 was closed at 7 PM and all the office staff left the office and in such circumstances, he also returned to his residence with much difficulty. In reply thereto, the respondents in para 3 of the counter, while not admitting the aforesaid stand, have stated that the applicant was admitted in Divisional Railway Hospital/WAT on 08.04.2025 and discharged on 26.04.2025 with advise to report after one month for review. He reported on 10.05.2025 before the Chief Medical Superintendent, Khurda Road and he was advised to appear before Dr. P.K.Das, Addl. Chief Medical Superintendent Khurda on 13.05.202 5to receive a referral letter to Divisional Railway Hospital/WAT for review. On examination of the stand of the applicant vis a vis the reply, we strongly deprecate the manner of handling the issue of the applicant and the casual manner of reply given by the respondents. The reply RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 13 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 given by the respondents cannot be accepted as a befitting reply to the specific stand taken by the applicant.
9. At the cost of repetition, it may be stated that the direction of Tribunal in the earlier OA was "to get the applicant examined either through AIIMS, Bhubaneswar or through duly constituted Medical Board in the Railway Hospital before his induction to his normal duty attached to his post preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, respondents may consider giving alternate light duty to the applicant". We find that the respondents instead of examining the applicant at Railway Hospital, Khurda Road or AIIMS, Bhubaneswar, reasons best known, sent him to Divisional Railway Hospital/WAT. It is seen that instead of giving the finding on the health condition of the applicant, the said hospital wrote letter to the HoD Professor, Govt. Mental Hospital, Visakhapatnam with remark that "the above named patient is a case of ? Bipolar Disorder (suspected) is being referred to you for opinion after thorough examination and opinion sent in confidential note to the above address", which is not at all appreciated because once a direction is issued by a competent court having jurisdiction, it has to RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 14 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 be obeyed and implemented without any reservation. The order cannot be made ineffective in one way or the other or by adopting softer fuse method or dillydallying practice and, thus, upholding such type of action would seriously affect and impair the administration of justice. Rather, the authority is under obligation to carry out the order of the competent court of law faithfully and in letter and spirit. The action of the authorities appears to be not free from capricious, arbitrariness and victimization to employee concerned being not in accordance with the specific order of this Bench. Further, humanity demands that no person faced with the risk of his life can be expected to perform his duties in the normal manner. It would be unnatural to expect any employer to continue with an employee who is complaining medically unfit to compel him to discharge his duties, that too in the instant case, the duty of the applicant more or less relates to running of train. The risk of life to the employee resulting from the condition of health normally renders such employee unfit for work and is not the concern solely of the employee himself rather it should also be concern of the employer. The only relevant consideration is the fitness or unfitness RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 15 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 of the employee as certified by the medical officer. Therefore, even after the specific order, allowing the applicant to move from pillar to post for getting medically examined and in not taking a concrete decision on the medical report already submitted is nothing but shows the arbitrary exercise of power and victimization since the applicant has not been getting his salary, pending his adjustment in suitable post, based on the medical report and being compelled to move from pillar to post with his ailing conditions, as noted above.
10. Be that as it may, the applicant specifically alleged that the Medical Board constituted at Divisional Railway Hospital, Visakhapatna had already examined him on 24.04.2025 and report was communicated to Divisional Medical Authority, KUR but no action has been taken thereon. Though applicant had specifically pointed out the same in the OA, no specific whisper has been made on the said report in the counter by the Respondents. This Bench cannot close its eyes to the fact that no person faced with the risk of his life can be expected to perform his duties in the normal manner. The risk of life to the employee resulting from the condition of health normally renders such employee unfit for work and is not the RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 16 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025 concern solely of the employee himself. It is as much the concern of the employer, in the interests of the Department. The only relevant consideration is the fitness or unfitness of the employee has to be certified by the competent Medical Board. It would also be unnatural to expect any employer to allow an employee, who is alleging not fit to discharge any particular duties, on medical grounds, or compel him to discharge his duties.
11. Taking into consideration all the above aspects, for the ends of justice, the Divisional Railway Manager, ECoRly, KUR (Res. No. 3) and the Principal Chief Medical Director, Central Hospital, ECoRly, Mancheswar (Res.No.2) are hereby directed to settle the matter either based on any such report at all submitted by the Medical Board held on 24.04.2025 or by sending the applicant for medical examination to AIIMS, Bhubaneswar within a period of 45 days and, in the later event, act upon the receipt of the report from AIIMS, Bhubaneswar and settle the issue within a period of 30 days therefrom.
RAVI KUMAR 2025.08.26 10:07:49 +05'30' 17 O.A.No. 260/00247 of 2025
12. In the result, with the aforesaid observation and direction this OA stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
13. Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
(Pramod Kumar Das) (Sudhi Ranjan Mishra)
Member (Admn.) Member (Judl.)
RK/PS
RAVI KUMAR
2025.08.26 10:07:49
+05'30'