Madras High Court
T.Lakshmikanthan vs Union Of India Rep. By The General ... on 28 February, 2012
Bench: Elipe Dharma Rao, N.Kirubakaran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 28.02.2012 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN Writ Petition No.1083 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2012 T.Lakshmikanthan ... Petitioner. Vs 1.Union of India rep. by the General Manager, Southern Railway, NGO Annexe, Park Town, Chenni-600 003. 2.The Senior Divisional Security Commissioner, Southern Railway, NGO Annexe, Park Town, Chennai-600 003. 3.The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Chennai Division, Southern Railway, NGO Annexe, Park Town, Chennai-600 003. 4.The Senior Divisional Officer, Rolling Stock, Chennai Division, Southern Railway, Tambaram, Chennai-600 045. 5.The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai-600 104. ... Respondents. Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order dated 16.12.2011 of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.1360 of 2010 and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondents 1 to 4 to appoint the petitioner in an appropriate alternative post in clerk category falling under a CEY ONE category or any sedentary job by duly protecting Petitioner's grade pay of Rs.2000 in terms of the protection privileged in Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995 on medical incapacitation. For Petitioner : M/s.Kavitha Deenadayalan For Respondents : Mr.Arvind Pandian for R-1 to R-4 R-5 Tribunal. O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by Justice ELIPE DHARMA RAO) Challenging the order, dated 16.12.2011, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, in O.A.No.1360 of 2010, in dismissing the claim of the petitioner to quash the order, dated 19.10.2010 passed by the second respondent thereby absorbing him as Technician Grade III in the Grade Pay of Rs.1900/- + Personal Pay of Rs.100/- and to be utilized at RS/TBM workshop areas only, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to appoint him in an appropriate alternative post in clerk category falling under a C-1 category or any sedentary job by duly protecting his Grade Pay of Rs.2000 in terms of the protection privileged in Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 on medical incapacitation.
2.It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed to the post of Constable in the Railway Protection Force in Chennai Division on 03.02.1996 in the pay scale of Rs.3050-4590 and during the year 2002, while in service, he met with an accident while undergoing rope climbing training, due to which, he sustained severe injuries in the back bone. It is also the case of the petitioner that he was medically examined by the Railway Medical Board and declared as unfit to carry on the job under the B-1 and B-2 categories in the Indian Railways and pursuant to the same, the second respondent, vide order dated 15.10.2003, informed that the petitioner is only fit to carry on job in C-1 category and below in sedentary job and on being declared medically unfit to continue as a Constable in the Railway Protection Force, which is a post under the B-1 category, the petitioner was asked to continue as a Constable in the Railway Protection Force in supernumerary capacity until a suitable alternative post is identified for him and while so, the second respondent, as per letter dated 08.08.2008, sought for the willingness of the petitioner to join in a medically de-categorized post, viz., Clerk-cum-Typist in the pay scale of Rs.3050-4590, for which, the petitioner, as per reply dated 14.08.2008, has exercised his option and given his willingness.
3.It is the further case of the petitioner that he was called for a re-medical examination on 06.01.2009 by the second respondent and after examination, the Medical Board recommended that the petitioner should be continued in a de-categorized post and consequently, the third respondent passed an order dated 18.10.2010, absorbing the petitioner as Technician Grade III and pursuant to the said order, the second respondent issued a memorandum, dated 19.10.2010, absorbing the petitioner as Technician Grade III in the Grade Pay of Rs.1900/- and Personal Pay of Rs.100/ -, based on which, the third respondent, as per order dated 26.10.2010, absorbed the petitioner in the Car (Rolling Stock) Shed at Tambaram under the administrative control of the fourth respondent.
4.It is the grievance of the petitioner that though he was declared as medically unfit to carry on the job in B-1 and B-2 posts, the respondents 1 to 4 failed to consider the same and posted the petitioner in a technical post, which falls under B-2 category, and the same is contrary to the medical report issued by the Medical Board recommending the petitioner to be absorbed in a clerical post under the C-1 category or in sedentary job, which the petitioner would be unable to carry on in view of his physical disability. Hence, the petitioner has filed O.A.No.1360 of 2010 before the Central Administrative Tribunal challenging the order dated 19.10.2010 issued by the second respondent.
5.The Tribunal, on consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, dismissed the original application by holding that there was no violation of the rules or provisions in the impugned order issued by the respondents therein and hence, there is no valid ground to interfere with the order passed by the respondents therein. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition has been filed.
6.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the entire materials placed on record.
7.On going through the entire materials placed on record, it is seen that not satisfied with the posting given to the petitioner as Technician Grade III in the work shop of the Railway Protection Force, when he was medically de-categorized, he has approached the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A.No.1360 of 2010 and when his claim was refused by the Tribunal, the present writ petition has filed contending that the order passed by the second respondent in posting him in a technical post, which falls under the B-2 category, is contrary to the medical report recommending the petitioner to be absorbed in a clerical post under the C-1 category or in sedentary job and thereby subjecting him to do extensive and strenuous manual labour, which the petitioner would be unable to carry on in view of his physical disability.
8.The respondents 1 to 4 have filed a common counter affidavit, wherein it is asserted that the petitioner was found fit to be absorbed as a Technician Grade III in terms of the guidelines issued by the Railway Board, dated 29.04.1999 and though he was found unfit for B-2 category, he was found fit to be utilized as a Technician Grade III at workshop area only, for which, the requisite medical classification is C-1 only. It is also asserted that when an employee is posted as a Technician in the Open Line, he is required to possess the medical classification of B-1 and above, whereas redeployment of the petitioner as a Technician Grade III requires C-1 category and the respondents 1 to 4 have taken sufficient care that the petitioner is posted only in the workshop area and not utilized in the Open Line area.
9.Apart from the aforsaid assertion, it is also asserted in paragraph No.16 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents 1 to 4 that the pay of the petitioner is protected as per Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and the posting was given to the petitioner as per the decision of the Committee comprising of the Senior Divisional Medical Officer, who assessed the suitability of the petitioner for the post of Technician Grade III. It is further asserted in paragraph No.19 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents 1 to 4 that though the willingness of medically decategorized staff/RPF staff of Chennai Division for change of category as Clerk-cum-Typist in the scale of pay of Rs.3050-4590 on bottom seniority was called for and the willingness letters were forwarded to the second respondent, only those who are graduates and found suitable were absorbed as Clerk in the Pay Band of Rs.5200-2020 with Grade Pay of Rs.1900/- and since the petitioner's educational qualification is only SSLC, whereas the clerks who were selected were Graduates or Graduates discontinued, he was not given the said post, more so on the ground that the clerical category, to which the petitioner seeks absorption, is placed in the Pay Band of Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.1900/-, which is not equivalent to that of the pay of the petitioner.
10.Therefore, in view of the assertion made in paragraph No.16 read with paragraph No.19 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents 1 to 4, we are satisfied that the persons working in the Railway Protection Force having more qualification were given the suitable post and depending upon the qualification of the petitioner only, he was posted as Technician Grade III in the workshop.
11.In view of the above, we see no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. Connected M.Ps. are closed. No costs.
bs To
1.Union of India rep. by the General Manager, Southern Railway, NGO Annexe, Park Town, Chenni-600 003.
2.The Senior Divisional Security Commissioner, Southern Railway, NGO Annexe, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.
3.The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Chennai Division, Southern Railway, NGO Annexe, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.
4.The Senior Divisional Officer, Rolling Stock, Chennai Division, Southern Railway, Tambaram, Chennai-600 045.
5.The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai 600 104