SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 173

2011 (2) Supreme 56
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Aftab Alam and R.M. Lodha, JJ.
S.K.M. Haider — Appellant
versus
Union of India & Ors. — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1630 of 2011
(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 35013 of 2009)
Decided on : 14-2-2011

IMPORTANT POINT
Categorization of posts for the purpose of vision tests must have nexus with the object set out in relevant provisions.

Headnote:Indian Railway Medical Manual – Para 510 – Categorization of posts for the purpose of vision tests must have nexus with the object set out in Para 510 – Having regard to the objective of division of groups/ classes for the purpose – The post of Ticket Collectors can not be held to be covered by Class B-2 – It will rather be covered by Class C-2 – The inconsistency in categorization of posts must not operate against promotion to the post of Ticket Collector. (Para 9)

       Facts of the case:

        This appeal involves question of denial of promotion on medical ground.

       Finding of the Court:

        The appellant could not have been denied promotion to the post of Ticket Collector.

       

JUDGMENT

R.M. Lodha, J. —

Leave granted.

2. A short question that arises for consideration in this appeal, by special leave, is as to whether the appellant has been rightly denied promotion to the post of Ticket Collector (TCR), Group ‘C’ post, on account of his having not been declared medically fit in Class B-2 under Para 510 of Indian Railway Medical Manual (for short, ‘IRMM’).

3. The appellant—S.K.M. Haider—joined the service in Northern Railway as Luggage Porter, Group ‘D’ post, on December 3, 1991. The next channel of promotion from Luggage Porter is to the post of Ticket Collector. Having acquired eligibility for promotion to the post of Ticket Collector, the appellant appeared in the written test held by the respondents on January 8, 2003. He was successful in the written test and was called for viva-voce by the Interview Committee on February 25, 2003. On June 24, 2003, a provisional list of the candidates who were found suitable for the post of Ticket Collector on the basis of written test and viva voce was prepared in which the appellant’s name was placed at Serial No. 25.

4. On July 3, 2003, the appellant appeared before the Medical Superintendent, Northern Railway, DRM Office, Ambala Cantt. (Respondent No. 3) for medical examination but he was not declared fit in Class B-2.

5. The appellant challenged the medical report dated July 3, 2003 by filing an appeal before the Chief Medical Director, Northern Railway. He was asked to appear before the Medical Board on September 15, 2004. The Medical Board found the appellant fit in Class C-2 with glasses. Based on the opinion of the Medical Board, the appeal preferred by the appellant challenging the medical report dated July 3, 2003 was rejected.

6. The appellant then got himself examined at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi on November 3, 2004 and it is his case that he was found medically fit in Class B-2.

7. The appellant aggrieved by his non-promotion to the post of Ticket Collector approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (for short, ‘the Tribunal’). The Tribunal, on February 8, 2006, after hearing the counsel for the appellant and the counsel for respondents, rejected the original application filed by the appellant.

8. Being not satisfied with the order of the Tribunal, the appellant moved the High Court of Punjab and Haryana for redressal of his grievance but there, too, he was unsuccessful and the writ petition filed by him was dismissed on March 21, 2009.

9. Para 510 in Chapter V of the IRMM deals with classification of staff for the purpose of vision tests of candidates and of serving Railway employees. It reads as follows :

“510. Classification of staff:-

(1) for the purpose of visual acuity and general physical examination of candidates and of serving Railway employees, the non-Gazetted Railway services are divided into the following broad groups and classes. The detailed categories of Railway posts under each of the classes/groups mentioned below are given in Annexure IV to this chapter:-

Groups Classes

A Vision tests A-1 Foot plate staff, Rail car required in the drivers and Navigating interest of public staff (For foot plate staff safety see para 520)

A-2. Other running staff, Other shunting staff, Point lockers, Station masters, and other staff in operative control of signals.

A-3 Loco, signal and Transportation Inspectors, staff authroised to work trolleys, Yard supervisory staff, Road motor drivers and gate keepers on level crossings.

B. Vision tests B-1 Such station and yard non required in the supervisory, shed and interest of the other staff, excluding shed employee himself man, as are engaged on or his fellow duties where failing eye workers or both sight may endanger themselves or other employees from moving vehicles, Road Motor drivers, permanent Way Mistries, Gang mates, Keymen and staff of the Railway Protection Force.

B-2 Certain staff in workshops and engine rooms engaged on duties when failing eye sight m

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top