SUDHAKAR PANI Vs. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUNDS COMMISSIONER PENSION EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUNDS ORGANISATION KARNATAKA REGIONAL OFFICE BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER-SUDHAKAR Pani is before me seeking for a certiorari to quash the order Annexure-F, dated 9th April, 2003.

(2.) PETITIONER was an employee of Shyam Textiles, Bangalore, which is covered by the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous provisions Act, 1952 (for short, 'the Act') Petitioner was member of the employees' Pension Scheme, 1995. He has paid contributions towards the pension fund. Petitioner while he was in employment collapsed while working as a result of which he sustained injuries on the head and was shifted to the hospital. He was diagnosed as having suffered hemorrhage of the brain due to high blood pressure. He suffered paralysis of the right arm and leg and his speech has become slurred. Annexure-B is the discharge summary. He was thereafter referred to esi hospital for follow up. ESI Medical Officer opined that the petitioner has become permanently disabled for carrying on his employment with the employer. Petitioner was compelled to leave his employment on account of physical disablement suffered by him. He thereafter, sought for disabled employee pension in terms of the scheme. He submitted form 10-D to the respondent. Respondent thereafter wrote a letter to the Director, Health and Family Welfare Services, with a request to examine the petitioner and to issue a certificate regarding petitioner's disablement. Petitioner thereafter appeared before the Medical Board and submitted himself for medical examination and awaited the process of his claim for disabled pension by the respondent. Thereafter, he received the impugned endorsement and in the endorsement it is stated that he is not entitled for disabled pension. Aggrieved by this endorsement, petition is before me.

(3.) RESPONDENT has filed statement of objection. In the statement of objections it is stated that the petitioner applied for pension on the ground that he suffered permanent physical disablement. He was directed to appear before the Medical Board. Respondent received the medical report and as per the report petitioner was found not eligible for disablement pension. Copy of the relevant extract of Manual of accounting Procedure is produced at Annexure-Rl. They have also filed the medical report in terms of Annexure-R2. In Annexure-R2, it is stated that petitioner was permanently physically disabled in Cl. 8 which would read as to whether the relevant nature of disablement has resulted in permanent and total disablement. While answering the query No. 8, the Medical Board has stated that the petitioner has suffered right sided Hemiparesis permanent and total disablement (around 90% ). Thereafter, the respondent referred to Annexure-R3 and in Annexure-R3 it is stated in Cl. 3 that the disablement needs to be total and only in that event the scheme can be sanctioned. The argument of the respondent is that Annexure-R3 comes in the way of settlement of pension.