KHEMAN MAHTO Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been preferred against a report given by the Medical Board about the disability and about the grant of benefits of Clause 9.4.0 of National Coal Wage Agreement. A subjective Conclusion is arrived at by the doctors is basically challenged in the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and the petitioner consistently alleges that he is unable to perform his work, whereas, doctors have examined the present petitioner and has arrived at conclusion that the petitioner is not entitled for benefit of Clause 9.4.0 of National Coal Wage Agreement. The said Coal Wage Agreement Clause reads as under:

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the respondents, who has submitted that the present petitioner was examined by the doctors, who have arrived at a conclusion, upon medical checkup of the petitioner, which is at Annexure-14 to the memo of the petition, as per the said opinion, the present petitioner is not entitled to get any benefit under Clause 9.4.0 of National Coal Wage Agreement. It is also submitted by the learned Counsel for the respondents that the opinion given by the experts may not be entertained by this Court in exercise of an extraordinary jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Medical Board has examined the present petitioner and has given an opinion. Medical Board has no personal grudge against the present petitioner. Thus, there is no misapprehension against the alleged Medical Board, who has given the medical opinion. In view of this Medical Board opinion, there is no substance in this writ petition especially, when the petitioner has already been reached at the age of superannuation and has retired from June, 2007.

(3.) Having heard learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I see no reason to entertain this writ petition, mainly for the; following facts and reasons: