AYODHYA TEWARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court: This Writ petition has been filed by Ayodhya Tewari who is a Senior Rakshak which post has now been redesignated as Nayek. It is stated by the petitioner as follows: The petitioner had been discharging his duties as Rakshak and senior Rakshak, Eastern Railway at various places including Asansol and Ondal and he continued to his post till 26th April, 1985 when he felt some eye trouble. In view of such eye trouble he got himself treated by the Divisional Medical Officer, Asansol. In course of such treatment the petitioner had to be operated upon. Consequent upon successful operation of the petitioner's eye the petitioner was declared fit by the concerned Divisional Medical Officer, Eastern Railway, Ondal under his Order No. H/Ex/UDL, dated 4.12.1985 on the basis of a special medical examination. By the said order, dated 4.12.1985 the petitioner was declared medically unfit in category EI and EII but the petitioner was found fit in category CI. By the said order, dated 4.12.1985 the petitioner was further asked to prefer an appeal to the Chief Medical Officer, Eastern Railway, Calcutta for reconsideration of such ending, if the petitioner so desired. A copy of the order is annexed as Annexure 'A'. From the said Medical Certificate it will appear further that the petitioner was declared medically fit in category CI and as such there was no/or could not be any impediment in allowing the petitioner to work as Senior Rakshak. After he was so declared medically fit by thy Divisional Medical Officer, Eastern Railway, Ondal, the petitioner made a representation to the Company Commandant, C-II Railway Protection Force, Ondal on 19.12.1985 praying for permission to join. However, the petitioner in the representation requested the concerned Company Commandant to regularise the matter in respect of the petitioner's duties with effect from 16.12.1985 and also to arrange for payment of his salaries. A Medical Certificate issued by the Divisional Officer was also annexed with the said representation but the petitioner was not allowed to join. He thereafter made several representations before the Company Commandant and to other superior officers to know the fact. As all these representations did not found any favour with the present respondents and the petitioner has not been allowed to join his duties and the petitioner has been obliged to move this Court for necessary reliefs as the respondents concerned have illegally refused to permit him to join his duties and is also withholding the payment of the salary. It is also contended that not only the respondent authorities have violated the provisions of the Indian Railway Manual but also violated his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution as by taking away his livelihood which is the only means of his subsistence the respondents have contravened the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution.

(2.) An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 5 by B. Mohan, the respondent No. 5.

(3.) It is contended by the Respondent that as the petitioner has been declared fit in category-CI the respondents could not permit him to join his duty as Senior Rakshak, that under the relevant Railway Establishment Manual the petitioner was entitled to suitable alternative post for which series of correspondence were made by the respondents upto 1988 but no alternative appointment could be given to the present Writ petitioner for no fault of the present respondents.