Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Dr Mohd Ajazur Rahman vs Govt. Of Nctd on 25 July, 2018
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI
O.A No. 2155/2016
M.A 2498/2016
With
O.A No. 2631/2016
M.A 2784/2016
C.P. No. 554/2016
New Delhi, this the 25th day of July, 2018
Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman
Hon'ble Ms. Aradhana Johri, Member (A)
(1) O.A No. 2155/2016 :
Dr. Mohd. Ajazur Rahman
Aged 52 years, Chief Medical Officer (NFSG),
S/o. Dr. Mohd. Hafizur Rahman,
R/o. Flat No. 270/2, UGF,
Masjid Moth, Near Uday Park,
New Delhi - 110 049. ....Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. Sagar Saxena)
Versus
1. Secretary Health
Department of Health & Family Welfare,
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi
Delhi Secretariat, I.P. Estate, New Delhi - 110 002.
2. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi
Through its Chief Secretary,
Delhi Secretariat, I.P. Estate,
New Delhi - 110 002.
3. Aruna Asaf Ali Govt. Hoispital
Through Medical Superintendent
5, Rajpura Road, Delhi - 110 054. ....Respondents
(By Advocate : Ms. Neetu Mishra for Ms. Rashmi Chopra for
respondents no. 1 to 3 and Mr. J. P. Tiwari for respondent no.
5)
(2) O.A No. 2631/2016 :
Dr. Mohd. Ajazur Rahman
S/o. Dr. Mohd. Hafizur Rahman,
2
O.A. No. 2155/2016 & O.A No. 2631/2016
R/o. Flat No. 270/2, UGF,
Masjid Moth, Near Uday Park,
New Delhi - 110 049. ...Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. Sagar Saxena)
Versus
1. Department of Health & Family Welfare,
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi
Through its Principal Secertary,
Delhi Secretariat, 9th Level, I.P. Estate,
New Delhi - 110 002.
2. Department of Health & Family Welfare,
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi
Through its Additional Secretary,
Delhi Secretariat, 9th Level, I.P. Estate,
New Delhi - 110 002.
3. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi
Through its Chief Secretary,
Delhi Secretary, I.P. Estate, New Delhi - 110 002.
4. Aruna Asaf Ali Govt. Hoispital
Through Medical Superintendent
5, Rajpura Road, Delhi - 110 054.
5. Union of India,
Through Secretary,
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare,
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi - 110 011. ....Respondents
(By Advocate : Ms. Neetu Mishra for Ms. Rashmi Chopra for
respondents no. 1 to 4 and Mr. J. P. Tiwari for respondent no.
5)
O R D E R (O R A L)
Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman :
We take a serious exception to the gross indiscipline on the part of the applicant who has filed both these O.As. He has not only resorted to suppression of facts and tried to mislead the Tribunal but also has stated incorrect facts that suited him, with sole objective of remaining at the place of choice, even at the cost of suffering to the 3 O.A. No. 2155/2016 & O.A No. 2631/2016 patients in the government hospital. He did not even care to honour the orders of Tribunal if he found them to be against him.
2. The applicant joined the Central Health Services on 25.07.2000 as Medical Officer. Thereafter, he was promoted as Senior Medical Officer on 25.07.2004. Through an order dated 21.02.2018 he was sent to the High Commission of India in Islamabad, Pakistan. He came to India from Pakistan on completion of that assignment on16.03.2009. Before his having been sent to Pakistan, he was serving in GNCTD. On his return, the Central Government passed order dated 16.03.2009 placing him once again at the disposal of GNCTD. Through order dated 24.04.2009, Delhi Administration posted the applicant at Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital and he assumed charge and was continuing there and held various posts.
3. Through order dated 30.05.2016 he was transferred from Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital to Rao Tula Ram Hospital by GNCTD. Challenging the same, the applicant filed Writ Petition in the Delhi High Court. However, that Writ Petition was withdrawn stating that on account of corrigendum issued by GNCTD, the cause of action did not survive. However, the O.A No. 2155/2016 was filed before the Tribunal challenging the very order of transfer.
4. The principal ground raised in the O.A is that the applicant is an employee of Central Government and it is only the cadre controlling authority, that can pass the order and the GNCTD does not have the authority to pass any order. Initially, order of stay was granted on 01.07.2016. However, it was vacated on 16.07.2016. It is stated that the applicant has thereafter been transferred from Rao Tula Ram Hospital to Lok Nayak Hospital. That fact however has not 4 O.A. No. 2155/2016 & O.A No. 2631/2016 been placed before this Tribunal. O.A No. 2155/2016 becomes infructuous once order of transfer challenged therein has become redundant on account of subsequent transfer.
5. The GNCTD repatriated the applicant to the Central Government through order dated 12.07.2016. Challenging the said order, he filed O.A No. 2631/2016. Here again, subsequent development has taken place, which renders the O.A redundant. Delhi Government is said to have withdrawn the order of repatriation. This fact was not brought to the notice of this Tribunal. It is only at the end of arguments spread over nearly two hours that this fact came out.
6. On behalf of Delhi Administration GNCTD, counter affidavit is filed. Various acts of indiscipline resorted to by the applicant in the context of handing over charge of sensitive department, paralysing the functioning of the hospital are stated. However, they are bit silent as to what made them to withdraw the order of repatriation.
7. We heard Mr. Sagar Saxena, learned counsel for applicant and Ms. Neetu Mishra for Ms. Rashmi Chopra for respondents no. 1 to 3 and Mr. J. P. Tiwari for respondent no. 5 at length.
8. The applicant no doubt was in the Central Health Services. It appears that he was serving in one or the other Hospital in Delhi at the time when entire health service was under the control of Central Government. It was in the year 2009, that separate health service was constituted for GNCTD. The fact remains that he went to Islamabad in the year 2008. He was in the service of a hospital, 5 O.A. No. 2155/2016 & O.A No. 2631/2016 which later came under the administration of GNCTD. On his return, on 16.03.2009, the Ministry of Health, Union of India passed an order dated 31.03.2009 placing service of the applicant at the disposal of the GNCTD. The applicant did not make any protest or demur against the order. Thereafter, the GNCTD passed an order posting the applicant in Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital. The applicant happily joined the hospital obeying the orders passed by the GNCTD. His present plea that he cannot be transferred or posted by authority other than the cadre controlling authority of the Union of India did not occur to him or he did not want to press that into service, obviously because the place of posting suited him. The record discloses that he adorned the role of a purifier and made everyone to stand on tenter hooks.
9. Having obediently obeyed the orders of posting at Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital issued by the GNCTD, he at once protested when the same authority transferred him to another hospital in 2002 and he moved to High Court as well as Tribunal. A perusal of the counter affidavit filed by respondents no. 1 to 4 speaks about the indiscipline resorted to by the applicant and his gross negligence of duties leading to severe inconvenience of the patients and hospital. Para 12 reads as under :-
" 12. The applicant has refused to hand over the charges of the branches directly under his sole control that are critical to patient care such as Ambulance Services, Transport and Chief Casualty Medical Officer (Accident and Emergency Department) thereby deliberately and intentionally paralysing the functioning of the hospital and directly adding to the misery of the already suffering patients. The applicant by refusing to relinquish his administrative charges of Chairperson - Medical Board, Chairperson - Disability Board and Nodal Officer - POCSO Act is also deliberately hindering the process of issuance of Medical Certificates to the deserving candidates in the field of 6 O.A. No. 2155/2016 & O.A No. 2631/2016 Judiciary, Police, Health & Family Welfare, GAD and Education Department among others. The callous attitude adopted by the applicant in refusing to hand over the records of the disability board has increased the anguish and added to the agony of the physically disabled persons awaiting their certificates that are needed to avail the benefits justly provided to them by the government. The hospital is still awaiting the records of the cases registered under POCSO Act to be handed over by the applicant who is knowingly obstructing their presentation to the Court of law thereby causing a setback to the judicial process of granting timely relief to the innocent victims covered under this act."
10. It appears that the applicant has some sacred and good relations with the Delhi Administration. Once the Tribunal vacated the order of stay passed in the context of his transfer from Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital to Rao Tula Ram hospital, the administration blessed him with another order, transferring him to Lok Nayak hospital, which appears to be of his choice. This time, the applicant did not even protest, much less filed any M.A in the pending O.A raising his objection to an order of transfer passed by GNCTD. He coolly joined that hospital. Thus, the order of transfer from Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital to Rao Tula Ram Hospital, and thereby, the O.A has become infructuous. However, it took nearly two hours of arguments for the learned counsel to realise this fact.
11. Now comes the other O.A. The applicant though, has challenged the order of repatriation, did not join the Central Government at least when this Tribunal declined to grant stay. The Delhi Government did not relieve him from their hospital. On the other hand, they issued an order dated 01.05.2017 withdrawing the order of repatriation. Even this fact was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal much less any M.A was filed. Any person in place of the applicant would have brought it to the notice of the Court. However, he was indulging in suppression of the facts from this 7 O.A. No. 2155/2016 & O.A No. 2631/2016 Tribunal etc. Once the order of repatriation challenged in O.A 2631/2016 has been withdrawn, nothing remains to be decided therein. Therefore, both the O.As are dismissed as infructuous.
12. The record discloses that several proceedings were initiated and applications were filed wasting the limited and precious time of the Tribunal. At every stage, the applicant has resorted to either misleading the Tribunal or suppressing the facts.
13. We impose a cost of Rs.50,000/- to be paid to the CAT Bar Library by the applicant within four weeks. If the amount is not deposited, the Secretary of the Bar Association is permitted to initiate proceedings against him. We also express our serious dissatisfaction about the manner in which the Delhi Administration changed its stand in the context of posting or repatriation of the applicant which encouraged him to cause severe inconvenience to the patients and wasting the time of the Tribunal.
14. We also direct Central Government to take note of these developments and decide whether or not to continue deputation of the applicant with the Delhi Government.
(Aradhana Johri) (Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) Member (A) Chairman /Mbt/
Note : The Registry shall mark a copy of this order to the Ministry of Health, Government of India.