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

2022 Supreme(Gau) 463

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Manish Choudhury, J.
Tapan Jyoti Bora, S/o. Biren Bora – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam Rep. By Commissioner and Secy. Health And Family Welfare Deptt. and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)/3787 of 2022
Decided On : 22-06-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Mintu Saikia

Point of Law : It is a settled position of law that when there is an alternative and equally efficacious statutory remedy available for relief the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which jurisdiction is discretionary and extra-ordinary in nature ordinarily not to be exercised by bypassing the machinery created under the statute for the same remedy.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 – Issuance of Disability Certificate - Power of High court to issue writs - Seeking a writ in nature of mandamus for a direction to State respondent authorities in Health & Family Welfare Department issue a disability certificate in favour of younger brother of the petitioner - It is a settled position of law that when there is an alternative and equally efficacious statutory remedy available for relief exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India which jurisdiction is discretionary and extra-ordinary in nature ordinarily not to be exercised by bypassing machinery created under the statute for same remedy. (Para 16).

Findings of the Court :

Extra-ordinary and discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India, this Court on analysis of provisions of alternative statutory remedy available to the petitioner, is of considered view that such remedy is an efficacious and adequate one providing also for an appeal and a second appeal as well as imposition of penalty in the event the provisions provided in the statute and the rules framed thereunder, that is, the ARTPS Act and the ARTPS Rules are not followed in extending the notified public service. In such view of the matter, this Court holds that this writ petition is not to be entertained and accordingly, it is not entertained. As it is open to the petitioner to have recourse to remedy under the ARTPS Act and ARTPS Rules by filing an appropriate application under provisions of said Act and said Rules to pursue and obtain the notified service, ‘Issuance of Disability Certificate’ in accordance with the procedure laid down therein, the petitioner is directed to pursue the alternative statutory remedy.

Result : Ordered accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. M. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D.P. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Health and Family Welfare Department for all the respondents.

2. The petitioner has instituted this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus for a direction to the State respondent authorities in the Health & Family Welfare Department issue a disability certificate in favour of the younger brother of the petitioner viz. Sri Jodupoti Bora.

3. The case that is laid by the writ petition, in brief, is that at around 6.15 p.m. on 16.03.2019, the petitioner’s younger brother, Sri Jodupoti Bora was proceeding from Lakhimpur towards his residence at Dhakuakhana via Gogamukh by riding a motor-cycle bearing registration no. AS-07-M-1463. At that time, another vehicle bearing registration no. As-05-E-2810 [Hyundai EON], proceeding from opposite side allegedly in rash and negligent manner, knocked the motor-cycle which the younger brother of the petitioner was riding. As a result of the accident, the petitioner’s younger brother, Sri Jodupoti Bora fell down from the motor-cycle on the road and sustained serious injuries in his right leg and other parts of his person. Sri Jodupoti Bora was immediately taken to the Civil Hospital at Dhemaji by Mrityunjay 108 ambulance. In connection with the accident, a First Information Report [FIR] has been lodged before the Officer In-Charge, Gogamukh Police Staion on 16.04.2019 and the said FIR has been registered as Gogamukh Police Station Case no. 68/2019 under Sections 279/338/427, Indian Penal Code.

3.1. It has been projected that Sri Jodupoti Bora had received treatments at various medical institutions. As per the medical certificate issued, Sri Jodupoti Bora had suffered fracture in his right distal femur and plate had to be implanted first and thereafter, removed.

3.2. It is the further case of the petitioner that his younger brother, Sri Jodupoti Bora had become disabled due to the injuries sustained in the said accident which is of permanent nature. In order to receive just compensation, a claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 has been filed before the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal [MACT], Kamrup [Metro] at Guwahati [‘the Claims Tribunal’, for short]. The said claim application has been registered and numbered as MACT Case no. 1149/2019 and the proceedings of the MACT Case no. 1149/2019 is presently pending at the stage of evidence. The owner and the insurer of the alleged offending vehicle have been impleaded as opposite parties in the said claim application.

3.3. In view of pendency of the claim application, MACT Case no. 1149/2019, a necessity has arisen for the claimant, Sri Jodupoti Bora to produce the disability certificate before the learned Claims Tribunal.

4. Mr. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the two applications, dated 15.02.2020 and 06.04.2020, were submitted by the petitioner on behalf of his younger brother before the respondent no. 3 and the respondent no. 1 respectively. It is his submission that when no response was received from either of the two respondent authorities the petitioner is constrained to approach the Court by instituting the writ petition seeking remedy with the aforesaid prayer.

5. Mr. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Health & Family Welfare Department has submitted that the two applications, stated to have been submitted by the petitioner on behalf of his younger brother, were not in proper format as per the extant executive instructions. As per the extant norms, an application for disability certificate is required to be submitted online and after scrutiny of such application, the same is to be considered by the Standing District Medical Board of the concerned district.

5.1. It is further submitted by him that the service, ‘I

      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
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top