The age of superannuation enhancement is only applicable to roles involved in patient treatment, and is not discriminatory to deny it for research-related positions.

ORDER

Per : Hon’ble Shri Lok Ranjan, Member (A)

The Applicant had filed the present Original Application upon being aggrieved by the Office Order dated 31.05.2016 of Senior Regional Director, Regional Office for Health and Family Welfare, Rajasthan (R.O.H.&F.W.) i.e. RespondentNo.4, vide which the Applicantwas retired on superannuation w.e.f. 31.05.2016 afternoon, from the post of Research Officer(R.O.) (Medical), National Vector Borne Diseases Control Programme (N.V.B.D.C.P.) ; without being considered under the Order dated 31.05.2016 of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (M.H.&F.W.) issued for enhancing with immediate effect the age of superannuation of the Specialists of Non-teaching and public health sub cadres and of General Duty Medical Officers (G.D.M.O.) of Central Health Services (C.H.S.) to 65 years.

2. Based on the pleadings of the parties, the relevant matrix of facts in the present case had emerged as follows briefly. The Applicant was initially appointed as ad-hoc R.O.(Medical) in the Malaria Operational Field Research Scheme (M.O.F.R.S.) and had joined on 20.04.1987 at the R.O.H.&F.W., Jaipur. Vide letter dated 29.09.1995, the M.O.F.R.S. was integrated with the National Malaria Eradication Programme (N.M.E.P.) [also, the National Anti-Malaria Programme (N.A.M.P.)] and 156 temporary posts were created under the Directorate of N.M.E.P. and Regional Offices of Ministry of H.&F.W., to be filled up by transfer of the existing incumbents working under M.O.F.R.S.;subsequently, an internal seniority list of ex-M.O.F.R.S. staff integrated with N.A.M.P. had been circulated vide letter dated 15.09.1997. The Director General of Health Service (D.G.H.S.), New Delhi had also written to the Regional Directors at R.O.H.&F.W. to ensure necessary action in pursuance of the Note dated 09.02.2000 of Director (Admn.), D.G.H.S. Headquarters, for regularisation of all ad-hoc appointments before 31.03.2000 ; eventually,vide order dated 29.03.2004 the Applicant inter alia had been appointed on regular basis w.e.f. 29.09.1995 in the post of R.O.(Medical) at R.O.H.&F.W., Jaipur. The Applicant had superannuated from the said post on 31.05.2016 afternoon.

3. After his superannuation, the Applicant had submitted a representation dated 18.06.2016 to the D.G.H.S., the Respondent No.2. Upon the same not being responded to, the Applicant had filed the earlier O.A. No.580/2016 in the first round of related litigationbefore this Tribunal. The same had been decided vide Order dated 21.07.2016, without commenting on the merits of the case – with the direction to the Applicant to prefer a fresh representation to the Respondents attaching a copy of order dated 08.02.2016 passed by Hon’ble Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No.82/2012 ; and further directing the Respondents to take a decision on that representation. The Applicant had accordingly submitted his representation dated 27.07.2016. The said representation had been disposed of vide the letter dated 03.11.2016 of the Administrative Officer,N.V.B.D.C.P. conveying in conclusion that the benefit of enhancement of retirement age to 65 years was not applicable for the Applicant. Purportedly, the same had been conveyed to the Sr. Regional Director, R.O.H.&F.W., Jaipur where upon its receipt on 11.11.2016 it was handed over in person to the Applicant, but also sent to him later vide Speed Post on 08.01.2018. Meanwhile, since the Applicant had purportedly not received the said letter dated 03.11.2016 in respect of his representation dated 27.07.2016, he had filed the C.P.No.040/2016 claiming inaction by the Respondents despite this Tribunal’s order dated21.07.2016. The said Contempt Petition had been closed by this Tribunal vide order dated 13.12.2018, while noting that Order dated 21.07.2016 passed in O.A No.580/2016 had already been complied with as the representation of the Applicant dated 27.07.2016 had been decided by the Respondents on 08.01.2018.

4. Meanwhile, the Applicant had filed the