Delhi High Court - Orders
Esic vs Dr. P.K.Jain on 5 May, 2021
Author: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
Bench: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Amit Bansal
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 359/2021
ESIC ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Zaki Kazmi, Adv.
Versus
DR. P.K.JAIN ..... Respondent
Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
ORDER
% 05.05.2021 [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING] CM 939/2021 (for exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions and as per extant Rules.
2. The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 359/2021
3. This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, impugns the order dated 23rd August, 2018, of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, allowing O.A. No.1102/2013 preferred by the respondent.
4. The respondent preferred the aforesaid O.A., seeking promotion to the post of Chief Medical Officer in the petitioner ESIC, instead of from that already granted in the year 2002, from 15th June, 1998.
5. We have heard Mr.Zaki Kazmi, Advocate for the petitioner.
6. The petitioner was appointed as an Insurance Medical Officer Grade-II in the petitioner ESIC, on ad hoc basis, w.e.f. 8th April, 1986; his services were regularised w.e.f. 19th May, 1992; on 15th June, 1996, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Insurance Medical Officer Grade-I. As per the recruitment rules, the eligibility for promotion to the next post of Chief Medical Officer, was either completion of six years of regular service on the post of Insurance Medical Officer Grade-I or completion of ten years as Insurance Medical Officer Grade-II and Insurance Medical Officer Grade-I and of which at least two years should be as Insurance W.P.(C) 359/2021 Page 1 of 2 Medical Officer Grade-I.
7. It was the contention of the respondent before CAT and which contention has found favour, that since in the recruitment rules, while providing for completion of six years as Insurance Medical Officer Grade-I, the words "regular service" were used but the said words were not used while providing for the residency of ten years as Insurance Medical Officer Grade-II and Grade-I of which two years should be as Insurance Medical Officer Grade-I, hence while fulfilling the latter of the two criteria, regular service was not essential and ad hoc service was also to be counted.
8. Mr. Zaki Kazmi, Advocate has drawn our attention to judgment dated 13th March, 2009 of this Court in W.P. (C) 2847/1998 titled Dr. Ashok Kumar Taneja Vs. Employees State Insurance Corporation filed as Annexures P-4 and P-5 to the petition, contending that it has been held therein that for the purposes of promotion, regular service is necessary and ad hoc service cannot be a substitute.
9. Even otherwise, according to us, the law is well settled in this regard. Prima facie, the view taken by CAT cannot be sustained.
10. Issue notice to the respondent, including through official channels, returnable on 18th August, 2021.
11. Till further orders, the operation of the impugned order of CAT is stayed.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J AMIT BANSAL, J MAY 5, 2021 / SU..
W.P.(C) 359/2021 Page 2 of 2