The High Court · 2025

Petition under Artrcle 226 o'f the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances slated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS to declare the impugned orders in Procg.No.A2l 112812024 daled 27 .1'l .2024 wherein rejecting the claim of the petitioner to retire her from service under medical invalidation grounds, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.661, General Administration (Ser.G) Department daled 23.1O.2008, and consequential orders issued by the 4th respondent vide Memo Rc.No.A1l 1B1l 2023 daled 06.12.2024, though the Regional Medical Board, Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad issued medical invalidation report on 15.05.2024, wherein declared the petitioner as permanently incapacitated for further service is illegal arbitrary and u nco nstitutiona I and set aside the same with a consequential direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner to retire from service on medical invalidation grounds in terms of the certificate issued by the Regional Medical Board Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad dated 15.05.2024 and lo consider the claim of her daughter for compassionate appointment in terms of the law laid down by the Honorable High Court in Writ Appeal No. 633 of 2021 dated O7.12.2021 . IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the Procg.No.A2l 112812024 daled 27.11.2024 and consequential order issued by the 4th respondent vide lvlemo Rc.No.A1l1B'112023 daled 06.12.2024 with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner to retire from service on medical invalidation grounds by duly taking into consideration of medical invalidation certrficate issued by the Regional Medical Board Osmania General Hospital. Hyderabad dated 't 5.05 2024 and to consider the claim of her daughter for compassronate appointment in terms of the law laid down by the Home High Court in Writ Appeal No. 633 o'f 2021 dated 07.12.2021 . Counsel for the Petilioner: SRl. NAYAKAWADI RAMESH Counse.l for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES lll The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION No.36564 OF 2024 Dated l7ttt December, 2O25 Betwee n: P. Padma AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary SC Development Department, Telangana Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad & (3) others ORDER: Petitioner Respondents Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.3 in passing the order dated 27 .11.2024 rejecting the claim of the petitioner to retire her from servicc under medical invalidation grounds and the consequential order dated 06.12.2024 passed by respondent No.4 directing the petitioner to immediately join the duty, the present Writ Petition is fiIed- 2\ Heard M r. Nayakawadi Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and iearned Government Pleader for Services-llI appearing for the respondents. PK, .] wp 36564 2024 3) The case of the petitioner is that she u,as appointed as Watch Womarr on compassionate grounds in the year 2OO7 and completed nearly 15 r'ears ol service. Further, as she suffered with various health problems. she proceeded on leave on medical grounds w.e.f. 17 .12.2022 for taking treatment and the said leave period was extended for the purpose of treatment for considerable length of time. As there is no progress in her health condition, she submitted a rcpresentation dated 24.11.2023 through proper channel to respondent No.4 seeking to consider her claim to retire from sen'ice on rncclical invalidation by referring her to Medical Board for medir:al examination in terms of G.O.Ms.No.661, dated

23.10.2008. Respondent No.4 has forwarded her representation to respondent No.3, who inturn has addressed a letter dated 19 .1O.2024 to the Superintendent, Government Medicai Hospital, Jagitial, to examine her case as per G.O.Ms.No.661, dated

23.10.2008, and issue medical reports for taking further action. In turn, tl-re Superinter-rdent and Chairman. District Medical Board, Government General Hospital, Jagityal, has addressed a letter dated 29.04.2024 relerring the petitioner to State Medical Board. Consequently, the Superintendent, Osmania General Hospital, I PK, J wp 36564 2024 u'hich is the Regional Medical Board, has examined the petitioner on 15.05.2024 and issued Medicai Invalidation Certificate and sent the medical report to respondent No.4 vide letter dated 02.08.2024 for taking further action in the matter. Thereafter, respondent No.3 lras issued the notice darted 31.08.2024 asking the petitioner to appear before the District Level Committee along with relevant documents for taking further action. Accordingly, the authorities have examined the case of the petitioner but surprisingly and shockingly respondent No.3 has rejected the claim of the petitioner to retire her on medical invalidation ground vide proceedings dated 27 .1L .2024, and consequently respondent No.4 . has passed the order dated 06.12.2024 directing the petitioner to join duty immediately, r.r,hich are impugned in the present Writ Petition.

3.1) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that contrary to the medical report given by the Regional Medical Board, the impugned orders are passed. Further, once the Regional Medical Board declares the petitioner as unfit for performing her legitimate duties, the District Level Committee cannot come to the conclusion that the petitioner is fit to perform her duties and the same is illegal and arbitrary. Further, respondent No.3 is not .t PK, J wp 36564_2024 competent to decide the rnedical condition of the petitioner. Therefore. the impugned order dated 23. 1O.2008 passed by responclent No.3 is rvithout application of mind and liable to be set aside. Hence, the learned counsel prayed this Court to pass appropriate orders by setting aside the impugned orders. In support oi his contentions, learned counsel has relied on: 1) Order dated 18.lO.2O2l passed by this Court in W.P. (Tr) No.61 1 i of 2017 as confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.633 of 202 1 vide judgment dated 07.12.2021', and W.P.No.33270 of 2024. 4\ On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader while admitting the fact that the petitioner was appointed as Watch Woman in the year 2013, has submitted that she filed an application before respondent No.4 on 24.11.2023 about her illness of paralysis, inabilitl, to discharge her official duties and proceeded on leave from 18.1 1.2022 onwards intending to retire on medical invalidation grounds. On such application, respondent No.4 vide letter dated 19.01.2024 has referred the case of the petitioner to the Superintendent & Chairman, District Medical Board, I I PK, J wp_36564 2024 Government General Hospital, Jagtial, who in turn has referred the case of the petitioner to Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad, i.e. the Regional Medical Board. Thereafter, the Regional Medical Board has issued the medical inva.lidation certificate dated

75.O5.2024 stating that the petitioner has completely and permanently incapacitated for further service in the department. Learned Government Pleader has further submitted that the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.66 1, dated 23.10.2008, has issued orders for revival of scheme of Compassionate Appointment to the dependents of Government employees who retire on medical invalidation and also issued certain guidelines therein. Pursuant to the proposals submitted by respondent No.4, respondent No.3 has'issued a notice dated 31.08.2024 to the petitioner asking her to attend the office of respondent No.3 on O5.O9.2O24 for examining her case. Accordingly, the petitioner has attended before the District Levei Committee members on 05.09.2024. The Committee has examined the case of the petitioner in detail as per the guidelines contained in G.O.Ms.No.66 1, dated 23.10.2008, and opined that the petitioner is not appeared to have been suffering from illness as opined by the Regional Medical Board, Osmania 6 PK, J t p-36564 2024 General Hospital, Hyderabad, and therelore respondent No.3 has rightl-v rejected the case of the petitioner vide impugned proceedings dated 27 .11.2024 and the same was communicated to the petitioner. Learned Government Pleader has further submitted that the decisions relied bv the learned counsel for the petitioner are not applicable to the facts of the present case. Therefore, it is praved to dismiss the writ petition. 5) This Court has taken note of the submissions made by respective parties and perused the material on record. 6l A perusal of the record revea,ls that on receipt of the representation dated 24.11.2023 from the petitioner seeking to consider her case to retire from service on medical invalidation, respondent No.4 has forwarded the same to the District Collector

1.e respondent No.3, who is the Chairman of the District Levei Committee. In turn, respondent No.3 has referred the matter to the Superintendent, Government General Hospital, Jagityal, to examine the case of the petitioner in terms of G.O.Ms.No.66 i dated

23.10 .2OOB, and issue medical report for taking further action The Superintendent, Government General Hospital, Jagityal, i 7 PK, J wP-36564_2024 turn has referred the matter for evaluation to the Superintendent, Osmania General Hospital, Hl.derabad, which is the Regional Medical Board. Accordingly, the Regiona-l Medicai Board has examined the petitioner on 15.05.2024 and issued the Medical Invalidation Certihcate rvith the foilou'ing obsen,ations: "We consider Smt. P. Padma have completely and permanently incapacitated for further service in the department to which she belongs in consequence of "Hypertension, Diabetic Mellitus, Paralysis of right upper limb and lower limb, she cannot perform her duties, hence invalid (falls under G.O.Ms.No.661, dated 23-10 2008 at SI.No. 16 (i) (g) (t) (ii))." 7l Further, the Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.661, General Administration Department, dated 23.1O.2008, redeflning the scheme of compassionate appointment to the dependents of the Government employees who retire on medical invalidation, in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.42i0/2003, dated i2.08.2008. in the present context, it is relevant to refer relevant portion of para 16 of the said G.O., which reads as under: The appointing authority or receipt of the application from the 16. Covernment employee for retirement on Medical Invalidation, shall refer the case to the Medicai Board. i I I l, 3 PK, J \.vp 36564-2024 {il At District level, a team of Doctors shail fumish the medical report to a District Lclel Committee oi officers. Accordingly, Government hercbl conslitute the nrerlical team (Medical Boards) as follorvs:- (a) Wirere tllcrc are teaching hospitals, other than Ranga Reddy and Hycierabad Urban Dislricts, the medical team (Medical Board) shall consist of the Superintendent of the Govt. General Hospital and two doctors of the cadre of Civil Surgeon, nominated by the Superintendent of Government General Hospital, among them one should be a specialist in the disease/illness rvith rvhich the ernployce is suffering and seeking Medical Invalidation and in case of a lad_r' enrplovee seeking a Medical Invalidation, of the two civil surgeons, one shorrlcl be a ladv civil surgeon. (b) ln the case of Ranga Reddy and Hyderabad Urban Districts, the Medical Bozrrds already existing in Osmania Ceneral Hospital and Gandhi General I{ospital shiill constitute the team of Doctors (Medical Board) rcspectively. (c) .. . (dl As and when a Government employee seeks and applies for retirement on medical grounds, the concerned appointing authority shall refer ' the case to the team of doctors (Medical Board) mentioned above. . (e) (0 The benefit of compassionate appointment shall be extended in case rvhere a Government servant totally cease to be employable and become a burden on his family i.e., when a Government servant is totalty incapacitated on account of serious illness/accident. (g) Accordingly, the disease for which medical invalidation shau be All 4 limbs allowed ma-y be an1, one of the following:- l. Paralysis (i) {ii) One side upper limb or lower limb (iii) Both lower limbs 2. End stage Renal diseases 3. End stage Liver diseases 4. Cancer with metastasis stage or secondaries 5. Dementla - Mental Disorder PK, J lcP 36564_2024

6. Severe Parkinson disease 7. Loss of iimbs (hands or legs) in case of drivers (ii) The appointing authority under whom the employee seeking medical invalidation is working, shall, after receipt of the Medical Boards recommendations refer the matter to a District Level Committee of officers for scrutiny and its recommendations. Government hereby conatitute the District lrvel Committee of the officers rvith the follorving:- 1 . District Collector 2. The District Medical & Health Oflicer 3. The District Head of the Department in which the employee is seeking retirement on Medical lnvalidation .. Chairman ... Member ... Member/ Convener ihe oistrict l,evel Committee shall consider the Medical lnvalidation report given by the Medical Board constituted in para 16 (i) above and scrutinize tie proposal for compassionate appointment on Medical Invalidation strictly in accordance with the guidetines and conditions stipulated in the existing instructions on the scheme. The committee is also competent to seek at its discretion personal presence of the employee seeking retirement on medical invalidation before considering the proposal.' B) From the above it is clear that as per para i6 (ii) of G.O.Ms.No.66 1, dated 23.10.2008, the District Level Committee headed by the District Coilector is competent to scrutinize the proposal for compassionate appointment on medica,l invalidation and also can seek personal presence of the employee seeking retirement on medical invalidation before consideration of such proposal. l0 PK, J \ p-36564 2024 9) in the instant case, admittedly, after receiving the said report datcd 1 5 .O5.2O'24 from the Regional Medical Board, respondent No.3. in terms of C.O.Ms.No.66 1, dated 23.10.2008, has issued the noticc dated 31.08.2024 to the petitioner asking her to appear phlsit:irllr. br:fore the District Level Committee on 05.09 .2024 for examirring her case. Accordingly, the petitioner has appeared phssir:;:11r, br:lore the Committee on 05.09.2024 and the Committee has scrutinizecl the proposal of the petitioner for compassionate apl)ointment on medical invalidation ald passed the impugned rejecti,rn ordcr dated 27.11.2024. Thus, in the instant case, there is no procedural irregularitl, or illegality on the part of respondent No.3 and the physical examination of the petitioner by the District Level Commil tee is also inconsonance with the guidelines prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.66 1, dated 23.10.2O08 10) Further, even as can be seen from the order dated

18.L0.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.('l'r) No.61 1 I of 2017 , on which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned single Judge has opined that in cases covered under clause g (1) and (7) physical examination oi the employee would be of some relevance. In the It PK,.I wp 36564_2024 instant case, admlttedly, the case of the petitioner fails under clause g (1). Therefore, the aclion of the respondents herein in physically examining the petitioner cannot be faulted rvith 1i) For the afore-mentioned reasons, this Court is of the vierv that there are no merits in the lr,rit petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. l2l Accordingll', the Writ Petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions pending, il any, shall stand ciosed. No costs. I To, SD/. A.H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR SISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. One CC to SRl. NAYAKAWADI RA[/ESH' Ad 2. Two CCs to GP FoR SERVICES lll ,High Court for the State of Telangana at loPUCl Hyderabad . [OUTI

3. Two CD CoPies DAN LS M/ HIGH COURI' DATED:171121202s ORDER WP.No.36564 of 2024 S TA ,R 2 { JA}t ?026 :l A (-' C) * DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS "a