Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
Steel Authority of India Limited – Appellant
Versus
Gangadhar Pan, son of Late Makhmal Pan – Respondent
W.P. (S) No. 2471 of 2018
Decided on : 04-01-2024
COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT - EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS - Article 226, Circular dated 25.03.2011, Clause 2.0, Clause 2.3 - The court discussed the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which allows for judicial review of administrative actions, and the specific clauses of the SAIL circular regarding compassionate appointments. The court interpreted Clause 2.3 as requiring a medical invalidation certificate for compassionate employment, emphasizing that deviations from established policy cannot be made without proper authority. The court found the tribunal's decision to quash Clause 2.3 arbitrary and irrational, leading to the conclusion that the applicant was not entitled to compassionate appointment due to the absence of a medical invalidation certificate.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petition was filed to challenge the Central Administrative Tribunal's order directing SAIL to consider the respondent's claim for compassionate appointment following the death of his father, who was an employee. The father had been treated for serious medical conditions but died before a medical invalidation certificate could be issued. The respondent had previously opted for the Employees Family Benefit Scheme, which included an undertaking not to claim compassionate employment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the tribunal erred in its interpretation of the circular and the undertaking provided by the respondent. It held that the absence of a medical invalidation certificate precluded the respondent from claiming compassionate appointment. The court emphasized adherence to the policy decision outlined in the circular and rejected the tribunal's finding of coercion regarding the undertaking.
Issues: 'Whether Clause 2.0 and 2.3 of the circular dated 25.03.2011 confers any right for compassionate appointment.', 'Whether the undertaking provided by the respondent is valid and binding.', "Whether the tribunal's finding of coercion regarding the undertaking is justified.", 'Whether the tribunal was correct in quashing Clause 2.3 of the circular.'
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that policy decisions must be strictly adhered to and cannot be deviated from without proper authority. It emphasized that compassionate appointments require a medical invalidation certificate, and the undertaking provided by the respondent was binding, thus disqualifying him from claiming compassionate employment.
Final Decision: The court quashed the tribunal's order and upheld the provisions of the circular, ruling that the respondent was not entitled to compassionate appointment due to the lack of a medical invalidation certificate and the binding nature of the undertaking provided under the Employees Family Benefit Scheme.
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated 09.08.2017 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (Circuit Bench at Ranchi) in O.A./051/00104/2016 whereby and whereunder the original application preferred by the respondent-original applicant was allowed directing the writ petitioner-SAIL to consider the claim of the respondent-original applicant for appointment on compassionate ground treating the death of the father of the respondent-original applicant under ‘medical invalidation’ and further set aside Clause 2.3 of circular dated 25.03.2011 being arbitrary and irrational and anti- employee in the larger interest of justice and equity
2. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, reads as under:
3. The father of the respondent-original applicant was appointed as Assistant Canteen Junior Technician in the Department of Personnel & Administration (Dept. P&A), Meghahatuburu Iron Ore Mines (RMD), Kiriburu, West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. While working as such, the father of the respondent-original applicant was admitted and treated in many SAIL hospitals for his treatment of Chronic Liver Disease and Chronic Kidney disease along with Septicaemia and Hepatic/Renal Failure but his condition was getting worse. Thereafter a Medical Board constituting three doctors referred his case to Sr. Dy Director (M), RMD, Kolkata to refer to Apollo Hospital, Kolkata for further review on 05.01.2015.
4. It is the case of the respondent-original applicant that his father has come to know about his medical condition on 17.01.2015 that he would not be recovered any more, as such he has given representation from Apollo Hospital itself on 21.01.2015 for declaration of ‘medical invalidation’ and also for employment to his elder son (respondent herein) but during treatment his father died on 09.02.2015 in harness before being declared ‘medically invalid’ by the duly constituted committee.
5. It is further case of the respondent-original applicant that the writ petitioner-authority did not take any decision for employment as such the respondent-original applicant approached the Tribunal by filing Original Application seeking direction upon the authority concerned for appointment on compassionate ground, which was allowed, directing the writ petitioner-SAIL to consider the claim of the respondent-original applicant for appointment on compassionate ground treating death of the father of the respondent-original applicant under ‘medical invalidation’ and further set aside Clause 2.3 of circular dated 25.03.2011.
6. It is evident that the father of the applicant-respondent, while serving under the writ petitioner-SAIL became ill, as such was admitted in several SAIL hospitals for his treatment of his ailment but his condition was deteriorated. Thereafter he was referred to Apollo Hospital, Kolkata. It is the case of the appellant that the doctor treating the respondent-employee under whom the employee was under treatment had given certificate of his medical invalidation on 17.01.2015. Pursuant thereto, the father of the appellant submitted representation for employment of his elder son, the respondent herein. Thereafter, the father of the original applicant-respondent has again given application for ‘medical invalidation’ and application for employment of his elder son (respondent herein) to the General Manager (Mines), SAIL, RMD, Meghahatuburu Iron Ore Mines (MIOM) in prescribed format. The same was forwarded to the higher authority on the same day to comply with the prescribed procedure of the scheme and even the opinion of the medical in-charge was received on 03.02.2015 wherein the doctor recommended the case of Makhmal Pan (father of the respondent) for consideration of medical invalidation on account of his suffering from the debilitating disease as per the provision of said scheme. However, before taking de
AI
Compassionate appointments are contingent upon the issuance of a medical invalidation certificate, and undertakings provided under employment benefit schemes are binding and cannot be disregarded.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of immediate consideration for Medical Invalidation in cases of Compassionate Appointment, and the obligation of the Authority to ....
Compassionate employment claims should not be denied solely due to the absence of medical invalidation certification if the employee was suffering from a debilitating disease.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the policy regarding compassionate appointment and the applicability of subsequent amendments to the case of the petitioner.
Compassionate appointment must be strictly followed in accordance with the relevant schemes and guidelines, and any deviation from the scheme is not permissible.
Compassionate appointments must be made promptly following a breadwinner's death; delayed applications undermine their purpose.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
