LAWS(MAD)-2013-8-101

UNION OF INDIA Vs. REGISTRAR CENTRAL

Decided On August 01, 2013
UNION OF INDIA Appellant
V/S
Registrar Central Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition filed by the Southern Railway Administration is directed against the order dated 15.03.2013 in O.A.No.381 of 2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal.

(2.) The second respondent's husband Manikandan was working as Commercial Clerk in Southern Railways and died in harness during 2010. The second respondent submitted an application for compassionate appointment, such application was entertained and she was sent for medical examination. By communication dated 12.09.2011, the second petitioner informed the second respondent/applicant that she was found unfit on medical ground, however, in the said communication, there were no reasons assigned as to on what ground she was found to be medically unfit. Thereafter, the second respondent submitted a representation and another medical examination is said to have been held during June, 2012, in which the second respondent's blood sugar level was checked and it is stated that it was around 140 and therefore, the Railway administration refused to grant appointment to her on the ground that she is medically unfit. This order was challenged by the second respondent before the Tribunal by filing the Original Application. The Railway Administration resisted the application by contending that compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right and as she has been declared medically unfit, the administration was justified in rejecting her claim.

(3.) The Tribunal, after hearing both the parties, by the impugned order, allowed the Original Application. The Tribunal took note of the fact that in the Railway administration, there is a Scheme for compassionate appointment and the case of the second respondent was considered in accordance with the Scheme. The Tribunal further found that the only reason assigned by the petitioners is based on the medical report, which is to the effect that the second respondent is a diabetic. The Railway Administration sought to describe the second respondent's medical condition as an "incurable disease" and declined to grant appointment on compassionate grounds.