Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 12337
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Member-(Judicial), Mr. Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member- (Administrative)
Rahul Dev Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through General Manager, North Central Railway Allahabad – Respondent
Original Application No. 615 of 2016
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Sanjay Kumar Om
For the Respondents: Shri Pramod Kumar Rai
Concealing medical unfitness can justify termination under Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules without an inquiry.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Termination of service - Appellant dismissed for allegedly concealing medical unfitness before joining Railway as ALP - Court examined validity of termination without inquiry under Rule 14(ii) of Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules - The applicant was declared unfit due to congenital heart anomaly, which he had concealed. (Paras 3.4, 10, 14)
(B) Natural Justice - The court held that failure to conduct an inquiry was justified under circumstances - It reiterated that concealment of medical conditions can lead to termination of employment. (Paras 12, 14)
Facts of the case:
Applicant, after being appointed as ALP, faced termination due to alleged medical unfitness stemming from previous evaluations, which he allegedly concealed during recruitment processes.
Findings of Court:
The court ruled termination lawful under Rule 14(ii) of DAR Rules due to applicant’s dishonesty in concealing medical history. No infringement of natural justice established.
Issues: Whether the applicant's termination was valid despite lack of inquiry; and the implications of concealed medical conditions during employment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded no need for a disciplinary inquiry given the gravity of the concealment, affirming the validity of the termination under the applicable rules. The court emphasized employee responsibility to be forthcoming about medical fitness.
Result: Dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute over employment termination based on concealed medical condition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. responses to allegations regarding employment and medical fitness. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. examination of rules regarding disciplinary procedures and natural justice. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. court's decision on the termination of employment based on allegations. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
ORDER
Delivered by: Hon’ble Mr. Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member (A)
Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar Mishra holding brief of Shri Sanjay Kumar Om, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Pramod Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The instant Original Application, under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act , 1985, has been filed by the applicant seeking following reliefs:
A. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dt. 7.8.2014, 9.3.2015 & 22.2.2016 (Annexure No. 1, 2 & 3) passed by Resp. no. 4, 3 & 2 respectively.
B. To issue a further writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to reinstate the applicant on the post of Asstt. Loco Pilot and grant him salary and other consequential benefits, as if the impugned order of removal has not been passed.
C. To pass any other suitable order or direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
D. To award the cost of the present O.A. in favour of the applicant. “
3. The brief facts, as per the applicant, are that he appeared in the examination for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot (hereinafter referred to as ALP) in North Central Railway, Allahabad Division. Followed by interview, he was directed to appear in the medical examination thereof. However, during the process of selection, another notification for the same post i.e. ALP was issued by the Railway Recruitment Board, Bhopal for the vacancies of Western Railway, Ratlam Division. The applicant also applied for the same and qualified the examination and was called for the medical test from Ratlam Division before any call from Allahabad Division, he went to Ratlam Division in October, 2007. Soon thereafter, the applicant received a message that medical test in Allahabad Division is also going to take place shortly, as such, the applicant abandoned the medical examination at Ratlam Division as he was interested in the vacancies of North Central Railway, Allahabad Division. The applicant did not undergo any medical test conducted by the Ratlam Division. The applicant appeared in the medical test conducted by the North Central Railway Hospital Allahabad and was declared fit in A-1 category.
3.1 Thereafter, the applicant was sent for one year training at Chandausi, which he successfully completed and vide order dated 17.02.2009, he was posted as ALP (Diesel) at Kanpur as a confirmed employee. He was performing his duties very well in almost all shifts. After 25.04.2011, the respondents, without assigning any reason, directed him to proceed on sick leave and since then they were not assigning any duties to him. Later on, on 21.05.2011 the applicant was directed to report at Northern Railway Central Hospital, New Delhi. As per their instructions, the applicant reported on 22.05.2011 but was directed to report on 24.06.2011 to appear before a medical board at Delhi. The applicant appeared before the medical board from 24.06.2011 to 01.07.2011 but he was directed to report back at Kanpur, where also, he was marked as sick but his attendance was maintained upto 23.02.2012.
3.2 Thereafter, the respondents, without assigning any reason, orally directed the applicant not to attend office and as such he made an application on 20.03.2012 to permit him to attend his duties and regularize his services. Since, the respondents did not pay any heed to the repeated requests of the applicant, the applicant filed Original Application No. 3109 of 2012 (Rahul Dev Gupta Vs Union of India & Others) before Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Be
