ORAL:
Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J)
1. Applicant has challenged letter dated 12.3.2010 and sought a direction to the respondents to get him medically examined by an independent Medical Board at Dr. R.M.L. Hospital, New Delhi or at Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, or in any other Govt. Hospital as per the Medical requirement of the Railways for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot (hereinafter referred to as ALP) and the case of the applicant may be considered for his appointment to the post of ALP on the basis of the medical report given by an independent Medical Board.
2. The brief facts, as stated by the applicant are in the year 2008 Railway Recruitment Board Chandigarh had invited applications for the post of Apprentices Assistant Loco Pilot had applied for it and was declared successful and sent offer of appointment vide letter dated 25.9.2009 (page 12). Thereafter, he was sent for medical examination vide letter dated 5.11.2009. Applicant was declared unfit in A-1 category (page 13) but without giving any reasons he was orally informed that he was having some heart problem. Applicant belonged to Jaipur, therefore, he immediately approached the S.M.S. Hospital and Medical College Jaipur, for his medical checkup, who after examining him declared on 28.11.2009 that he is fit in A-1 category for the post of ALP for which category he had applied in the Indian Railways (page 16). He even got himself checked at Safdarjung Hospital, who after examining him declared that applicant is not suffering from any cardiac problem and also observed that Echo was normal. This was noted on 10.2.2010 (page 21). The applicant also went to the AIIMS Hospital who also checked the applicant and found no structural heart ailment (page 23). In view of above, applicant requested the authorities to hold his medical re-examination. The respondents once again declared him unfit in A-1 category vide letter dated 26.11.2010 (page 14), that too without giving any reasons. The applicant gave another representation to the authorities, whereupon he was informed vide letter dated 12.3.2010 as follows:-
“An appeal dated 18.01.2010 from Shri Rejender Prasad Meena, candidate for the post of App. A.L.P. is being sent to you with the following observations:
In terms of Para 522 (1) (i) of the I.R.M.M. Third Edition, 2000 there is, ordinarily, no right of appeal against the findings of an examining medical authority. In this case, however, first appeal of the candidate has already been disposed of by the CMS/DLI.
Further, the Medical certificates issued by Dr. Prakash Chandwani of Heart and General Hospital and Dr. M.S. Isser of Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi are not in line with the instructions contained in Para 522 (1) (ii) of I.R.M.M., Third Edition, 2000.
Moreover, the Appeal has been sent directly to this office, without routing the same through proper channel.”
3. It is stated by the applicant that he sent a representation through proper channel on 22.4.2010 (page 29) stating therein that AIIMS, Safdarjung Hospital and SMS Hospital, Jaipur have informed him that he is not suffering from any heart disease, therefore, he may be reconsidered for appointment to the post of Assistant Local Pilot by an independent Medical Board (page 29). But since no reply was being given, he had no other option but to file the present OA seeking the relief, as mentioned above.
4. Counsel for the applicant, at the time of arguments, handed over letter dated 11.2.2010 addressed to the applicant by the Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer which reads as under:-
“Sh. Rajender Prasad Meena,
S/o Sh. Ram Kishan Meena,
R/o Bhad (Shekhwala),
Post Nabhawala Waya-Saithal,
Tehsil Jamwaram Gher,
Distt. Jaipur, Rajasthan-303507.
Sub.: Appeal for 2nd time re-medical for the Post of Apprentice Loco Pilot.
Ref.: Your representation dated 23/11/09.
In reference to above, it is informed that you were declared medically unfit in A-one medical classification vide medical memo No.285796 dt. 5/11/09.
On appeal you were again directed to medical authorities CMS.DLI, but again you were declared unfit vide medical memo No.-276535 dated 1/12/09.
Again your request for 2nd time re-medical examination was referred to CMS/DLI for further consideration as per codal provisions, though there is no further provision for 2nd appeal under para 522(i) of IRMM for the candidates.
CMS/DLI vide letter dt. 5/2/10 has re-iterated as under:-
“The candidate was declared unfit as he has undergone Lasik surgery and the same was confirmed during the appeal.
The appeal has been duly considered with proper application of mind and if necessary, investigations were also done.
The reason for declaring unfit has been given clearly and it was the same as given earlier and confirmed during the appeal.”
In view of above, your further appeal against the above decision of medical authorities cannot be considered as there is no provision for such consideration in the IRMM.
(S.P. Sharma)
For Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer,
New Delhi”
5. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that respondents are passing stereotyped letters to all the candidates. At no stage of time, applicant was informed that he was suffering from any eye disease. The same letter has been given to other candidates also which shows that candidates are declared unfit in a stereotyped manner. In any case, he has only prayed that he should be examined by an independent Medical Board so that necessary orders may be passed in case he is found fit by an independent Medical Board. He has placed reliance on judgment dated 1.2.2012 passed in OA No. 442/2011 in similar circumstances passed by this Tribunal.
6. Respondents on the other hand have opposed this OA. They have stated the Railway working is connected to the transportation business and safety of the numerous commuters is involved, therefore, a person who is unfit medically, cannot be deputed for the operation of the train.
7. They have further stated that the Medical Officers engaged in Pre Employment Medical Examination are well familiar with the different nature of jobs associated with various categories of employment in Railway. It is further submitted that the S.M.S. Hospital, Jaipur, and Safdarjung Hospital, are not connected to Railway working or well informed with the responsibility/duties connected with different categories of the Railway employees, therefore, they are not appropriate authority to decide the fitness of the employee to a category connected with train operation and responsible for the safety of lives of commuters and Railway employees/Property. It is pertinent to mention here that the organizations like Railways cannot compromise with safety aspects at any cost. Indian Railway Medical Manual (IRMM) has published detailed guidelines regarding the physical and visual standards of candidates appearing in various medical categories. Judicious pre-employment medical examination will reduce the possibilities of (i) Accidents due to human errors, (ii) Premature decategorisation and alternative employment without any significant loss of emoluments and (iii) Wastage of human and financial resources due to untimely loss of experienced and trained staff.
8. They have further stated that the applicant was examined by the Senior Medical Officer, Northern Railway, Divisional Hospital, New Delhi, and he was found unfit in the A-one category vide Medical Memo dated 5.11.2009. Accordingly, applicant was informed vide letter dated 18.11.2009 that he was re-examined by the Chief Medical Superintendent, Northern Railway, Divisional Hospital, New Delhi, and again declared medically unfit in A-1 category vide Medical Memo dated 1.12.2009 and was accordingly informed vide letter dated 29.12.2009. The applicant was found medically unfit due to Ejection Systolic murmur on secondary Aortic Valve. Mildly thickened Aortic cusp and mitral leaflet with increased flow velocities. The etiology can be Rheumatic. There is also mildly raised pulmonary artery pressure (Echo No.2143/09 dated 1.12.2009), therefore, he is not fit to be given appointment on the post. They have thus prayed that the OA may be dismissed.
9. We have heard both the counsel and perused the pleadings also.
10. Though respondents have stated that the applicant was informed vide letters dated 18.11.2009 and 29.12.2009 that he was unfit in A-1 category but none of those letters have been placed on record. In para 4.4. of the OA applicant has specifically stated that he was informed verbally that has been declared medically unfit due to some heart ailment without giving any reasons. This has not been disputed by the respondents nor they have been able to show that the reasons for unfitness were communicated to the applicant at any stage. On the contrary, at the time of arguments, counsel for the applicant had produced letter dated 11.2.2010 addressed to the applicant which shows that the applicant has been found unfit as he had undergone Lasik Surgery which was stated to be confirmed during the appeal whereas admittedly, even as per respondents stand, at no stage was applicant declared unfit due to Lasik Surgery.
11. At this stage, it would be relevant to note that even in an earlier case which was decided by us on 1.2.2012 in OA No. 442/2011 the candidate therein had been informed verbatim the same reasons for rejecting his appeal for second time re-medical examination which was later admitted by the respondents to have been issued by mistake when similar letters are being dispatched one after another, it cannot be termed as mistake. It only shows that respondents are passing the orders in a mechanical manner without even looking at the file of the individual, which is definitely not in the interest of justice. This case, therefore, calls for interference.
12. Before passing the orders, we would like to note that we are fully aware that in matter of appointment to the post involving safety of trains, utmost precautions have to be taken and nobody can be given appointment unless the candidate fulfills the medical requirement but at the same time, when we find that respondents are not communicating the reasons to the candidate concerned why he has been found unfit for the post in question and reject appeals give reasons in a mechanical manner, it creates a doubt in the mind whether respondents are acting in a fair manner. Respondents have stated in the counter affidavit that applicant was suffering from number of ailments connected with the heart, but those reasons were not been communicated to the applicant. The applicant has shown himself in three different hospitals including AIIMS which is a prestigious hospital and Safdarjung Hospital which is a Government Hospital. All the three hospitals have noted that the applicant is not suffering from any heart problem. In these circumstances, we feel ends of justice would be met if respondents are directed to hold re-examination of the applicant through an independent Medical Board. We, therefore, direct the respondents to request the Medical Superintendent, R.M.L. Hospital to constitute a Medical Board for examining the case of the applicant by giving the medical report of the Railways and informing them why applicant has been found unfit by the Railway authorities for the post of Apprentice Loco Pilot. They shall also inform the Medical Superintendent the requirement of medical for the post in question as per the rules so that after examining the applicant, the independent Medical Board may give its report with regard to the fitness or unfitness of the applicant. The respondents shall also request the Medical Superintendent, R.M.L. Hospital to give the report expeditiously, so that follow up action may be taken by the respondents thereafter. This exercise shall be completed by the respondents within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case applicant is found unfit by the independent Medical Board, that would be end of the matter but in case applicant is found fit, respondents shall pass appropriate follow up orders in accordance with law within one month thereafter.
13. With the above direction, this OA stands disposed of. No order as to costs.