3.i$J:r??il14 v. Manasing Director

PetitionUnderArticle226oflheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ' Order or Direction' more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the 4th respondent in declaring me as medically fit for duties as per the result without conducting proper medical examination by the speciarist even though the petitioner is not able to perform his duties in view of various ailments illegal arbitrary abuse of process of law violation of principles of natural iustice and discrimination and set aside the ; I : 1 result of the corporate lvredicar Board and consequenay direct the considering the representation dI 30t1212022 submitted by him in the interest of jr,rstice. t.A.NO: 1 0F 2023 Petition Under section i 5i cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed ir support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider my representa rion dt. 30r12t2022 andappoint his famiry members who is erigibre to work in the respondent c.mpany on the ground of medicar invaridation of petitioner. Nor in The singareni corieries company Limited As per the rures and reguration of compassionate appointment in The singareni corieries company Limited pending disposar of the above writ petition Counsel for the petitioner : SRI R.SHEETAL KUMAR 9.:ySljgt the Respondenrs : SRI p.SRt HARSHA REDDY (sc FoR StNGARENt COLLTERTES CO.LTD) The Court made the following ORDER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA w PE TI N .16 11 20 ORD ER: Heard Sri R.Sheetal Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the pet'tioner and Sri P'Sri Harsha Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the resPondents. r th Co rts ki r 2 as under: "...to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in declaring me as medically fit for duties as per the result without conducting proper medical examination by the specialist even though the petitioner is not able to perform his duties in view of various ailments illegal arbitrary abuse of process of law violation of principles of natural justice and discrimination and set aside the result of the Corporate Medical Board and consequently direct the considering the representation dt 30/1212022 submitted bY him in the interest of justice"'" It is specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner is 3. Timberman in the respondent company and served the company for 30 years without any negative record' The specific case of the I I I i i i I I I i 2 SN, J petitioner is that the petitioner is suffering from Back pain, Knee pain and Neck pain and so petitioner made an application to the company for medical examination with regard to his fitness to work. The :;ingareni Corporate medical board after examination of the petitioner gave the report whereby it reporte,J that the petitioner is "Fit for the Job.,, however, the reports given by the NIMS and two other institutions show that the petition€:r is not fit for the job. Hence, the Singareni Corporate medical board report with regard to the petitioner,s fitness is nothing but an attempt to exploit the workman, aggrieved by the same and seeking the compassionate appointment to family members of the petitioner, duly recognizing petitioner,s services rendered to the SCCL, the petitioner prt_.ferred this writ petition.

4. The limited retief sought for by the petitioner in the present Writ petition is a direction to the 3.d respondent to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put_forth vide petitioner,s representation, dated 3r,,L2.2r/22 seeking reference of petitioner,s case to the Medicar board and to medically invalidate petitioner and provide dependent job to petitioner,s son. 3 SN, J

5. Learned counsel aPPearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner retired from services on petitioner's superannuation in September. 2022 and as on the date, when petitioner represented petitioner's grievance through the representation, dated 3O'12'2O22 addressed to the 3'd respondent herein, the petitioner had only seven (07) months of service left and the request of the petitioner however had not been considered til! as on date. Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the 6 respondents submits that the writ Petition could be disposed of directing the 3'd respondent to consider the grievance or request of the petitioner made vide representation, dated 3O.L2.2O22 addressed to the 3'd respondent herein in accordance to law and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable period'

7. Learned counse! appearing on behalf of the petitioner does not dispute the said submission made by the learned standing counse! appearing on behalf of the respondents' I Takinq into co siderati on:- ) t I I ,: 4 SN, ] a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on beharf of the petitioner and rearned standing appearing on behalf of the respondents. c) The contents of the representation of the petitioner, dated 30.12"2022 addressed to the 3.d respondent. d) The fact as borne on record that the petitioner,s request for providing dependent job to petitioner.s son made vide said representation of the petitioner, dated 3O.L2.2O22 addressed to the 3.d respondent was prior to seven (O7) months of the petitioner,s retirement in September, 2022 and since, the said representation of the petitioner had not admittedly been considered as on date. I The Writ petition is disposed of directing the 3.d respondent to consider the graevance of the petitioner as put-forth vide petitioner,s representation,. dated 2.2022 addressed to the 3.d respondent seeking g dependent job to the petitioner,s son in nce to law, within a period of three (O3) weeks ate of receipt of copy of the order and duly te the decision on the said representation of il,' \ To 5 SN, J the petitioner, 3O.t2.2O22 to the petitioner herein' Howeverr there shall be no order as to costs' Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. SD/. P. PADM ANABHA REDDY E w nectsrRRR //TRUE COPY// S CTION OFFICER

1. The Chairman and ltlanaging Director, Singareni Collieries ComPanY Limited' Singare ni Bhavan, Khairatabad, HYderabad. 2. The Director (PA and W) SCC L, The Singare ni Collieries ComPanY Limited' Kothagudem Bhadradri Kothag udem District 3. The General [tIanager Personn el, Welfare and CSR The Singareni Collieries ComPanY Limited, SCCL Welfa re Wing CorPora te Personnel Department Singareni Bhavan rate Medical Board, The Singareni Collieries 4. The Chief Medica ComPanY Limited 5. One CC to SRI R 6. One CC to SRI P CO.LTD) Advoca 7. Two CD CoPies (r- , Hyderabad I Officer, CorPo , Kothag udem Bhad iadri Kothagudem District .SHEETAL KUMAR, Advocate tOPUCI SRI HARSHA REDDY (SC FOR SINGARENI COLLIERIES te [OPUC] SA GJP HIGH COURT DATED:0410412A25 C.C. TODAY , $b. s] rA r€. -c [9 t. f) I t[25 (:) .).,, ti<,l]t,:: .;... 1/ ir' .:,,,r' -.'.\ ,'. ORDER WP.No.16111 of 2023 t) -. \ DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. Pa- \l' 1 \ >\