UNION OF INDIA Vs. M S RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question which arises for consideration in this appeal arising out of a judgment and order dated 13-10-2000 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.6993 of 2000 is as to whether an order in terms of Rule 38 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 holding the respondent herein as permanently incapacitated for performing the service is valid in law.

(2.) The respondent was appointed as Constable in the Central Reserve Police Force in the year 1983. He was later on promoted to the post of Lance Naik. He was, however, declared temporarily unfit on 9-1-1996. He was under treatment from 9-1-1996 to 18-7-1996, The Chief Medical . Officer of Base Hospital-II, Hyderabad in terms of a letter dated 17-8-1996 recommended for his invalidation from the post. He, however, was given guard command duty till 17-1-1997. The Departmental Rehabilitation Board recommended for his retention for one year as he was being sent to the hospital for regular check up. The Chief Medical Officer (SG) reported on 9-5-1998 ...that the respondent was fit for active duty by continuing on anti-hypertensive drugs. He, however, was again referred to Medical Invalidation Board whereupon in terms of a report dated 27-7-1998 it was opined that he may be continued in service with regular treatment. Yet again he was referred to Osmania General Hospital and the doctors opined that he is fit for duties which was accepted by the Chief Medical Officer of Base Hospital II. However, again a Medical Board was constituted on 16-1-1999. The Board curiously on 25-3-1999 held that the respondent is permanently incapacitated from further service in the Force whereupon a invalidation notice dated 5-4-1999 was issued. The respondent got himself examined in Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad and a Board of medical experts opined that the respondent is fit to carry on his duties. Yet again on the basis of such report a Medical Board was constituted and the said Medical Board again found him unfit for duty for hyper-tension treatment. The respondent, however, again was sent to the Board of Gandhi Hospital whereupon the impugned order dated 23-3-2000 was issued. The respondent filed the writ petition inter alia contending that the 3rd respondent in the writ petition being appellant No.3 herein had been trying to see that he be removed from service and with that end in view had been trying to influence the authorities. It was contended that at all levels the experts opined in his favour; there is no valid or cogent reason to issue the said order dated 23-2-2000.

(3.) The case of the appellants, however, was that the respondent had been suffering from uncontrollable hyper-tension, fatty degeneration of liver dylipe-demis, diastolic dysfunction of heart and poor effort tolerance VCS and he was under treatment with effect from 9-1-1996. Rule 38(1) of the said Rules reads thus: Invalid Pension:- (1) Invalid pension may be granted if a Government servant retires from the service on account of any bodily or mental infirmity which permanently incapacitates him for the service.