RAVINDRA v. GHUGE & Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ. DATE
Facts
*1* 932y wp9211o24IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9211 OF 2024(Board dt.27.08.2024)SHAIKH SAMEENA BEGUM SHAIKH HAMIDVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITSSECRETARY AND OTHERS...Shri Nitin T. Tribhuwan, Advocate for the Petitioner.Ms.Neha B. Kamble, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.Shri P.D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3/ZP.... CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ. DATE :- 28th August, 2024Per Court :-1.We have heard the learned Advocates for therespective sides and perused the petition paper book with theirassistance.2.The issue falls in a very narrow compass. The son ofthe Petitioner has a locomotor disability. Today, he is 10 yearsold. In the first report, permanent disability is up to 42% as perthe Disability Certificate issued by the Medical Authority at Beeddated 09.05.2022. In the second medical examination, the
Legal Reasoning
*2* 932y wp9211o24disability turned out to be 0 %.3.In our order dated 24.02.2023, passed in WritPetition No.1519/2023 (Hanuman Yashwant Sarvade andothers vs. The State of Maharashtra and others) andconnected matters, we had observed in paragraph Nos.3 to 7, asunder:-“3. In all there are 336 candidates, who presentedmedical certificates obtained from variousauthorities, declaring them to be 40% or moredisabled. By way of an illustration, we note that someof the candidates, who claim to be suffering fromhearing impairment, have procured certificates ofthey being 73% disabled. There are many, whoclaimed to be suffering from hearing impairment andhave received certificates indicating more than 40%disability. The Zilla Parishad referred their cases tothe Medical Board of the Swami Ramanand TirthRural Government Medical College and Hospital atAmbajogai, Dist. Beed, and upon examining suchcases, for illustration, the person with hearingimpairment, who was issued with a 73% disabilitycertificate, is found to be 10% disabled and one ofthem, who had acquired 70% disability certificate, isfound to be absolutely normal with 0% disability. It isin this backdrop that, these petitioners have beensuspended by the Zilla Parishad on the ground ofattempting to play a fraud on the employer. 4. Considering that, most of these petitioners hadearlier acquired certificates from the Medical Boardor a Committee of the Doctors, and since theCommittee headed by the Dean of the AmbajogaiMedical College has submitted a report, indicatingmuch lower disability percentage and in some caseseven 0% disability, that these petitioners areagreeable to abide by the Government Resolution
Decision
*3* 932y wp9211o24dated 14/09/2018, and are willing to be examined bythe Medical Committee of the J.J. Hospital atMumbai. Each of them states that the Zilla Parishadmay issue them a covering letter and refer them to theJ. J. Hospital on particular dates and they are willingto be examined by the Appellate Medical Board of theJ.J. Hospital, Mumbai, comprising of the Dean, theMedical Superintendent and a Subject Expert, who isa Senior Professor.5. In view of the above, the learned Advocate for theZilla Parishad submits that, the Zilla Parishad wouldissue a letter addressing the Dean of the J. J.Hospital, Mumbai, along with a copy of this order,and thereafter, issue letters to the individualpetitioners and the similarly placed other teachers, toattend the medical examination by the AppellateMedical Board at the J. J. Hospital on particulardates and time.6. In view of the above statements recorded, thesepetitions are disposed off. The impugned suspensionorders stand set aside. It is made clear that, after theAppellate Medical Board of the J. J. Hospital,Mumbai, tenders it’s report in a sealed cover,addressed to the Chief Executive Officer, ZillaParishad, and that if any teacher is found to havesuffered lesser or no disability amounting to a fraud,the Zilla Parishad will be at liberty to initiateappropriate disciplinary action. The petitioners areagreeable.7. Pursuant to this order, if any of these petitioners/candidates as like the petitioners, desire to confessand tender an apology to the Zilla Parishad and seekpardon, they are at liberty to do so within 15 daysfrom today and in such cases, the lapse on their partmay be condoned with a strict warning by the ZillaParishad, with a rider that, they will never indulge inany such act in future. Insofar as those teachers, whohave secured the job on the basis of their disabilitycertificates, the Zilla Parishad is at liberty to referthem also, to the Appellate Board of the J. J.Hospital, as directed above.”4.The learned Advocate for the Respondent/ Zilla *4* 932y wp9211o24Parishad submits, on instructions, that after this Court passed theorder on 24.02.2023 (supra), the Petitioner’s son is yet to bereferred to the Medical Board for medical examination in Sir J.J.Group of Hospitals, Mumbai. The Zilla Parishad is clueless as tohow the Petitioner acquired the certificate from the AssociateProfessor, whose name appears from the signature to be Ankitand who has issued the Disability Certificate dated 28.12.2023.The learned Advocate points out the communication dated29.12.2023 addressed to the Petitioner by the MedicalSuperintendent of Sir J.J. Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, statingthat the son of the Petitioner has been medically examined by theAssociate Professor of the Orthopedic Department.5.In view of the above, the question is as to underwhat authority did the Associate Professor examine the son of thePetitioner to issue the Disability Certificate so as to be used bythe Petitioner in this petition and seek restoration of the serviceconditions. Keeping in view the order dated 24.02.2023 (supra),if the Petitioner wanted her son to be examined by the MedicalBoard of Sir J.J. Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, she should haveapproached the Zilla Parishad for a letter recommending the case *5* 932y wp9211o24for medical examination.6.We had directed the Medical Board of Sir J.J. Groupof Hospitals, Mumbai, to tender it’s report in a sealed coveraddressed to the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad. Thiswas to be done after the Zilla Parishad had forwarded a referenceletter, referring a candidate for medical examination.Surprisingly, the Petitioner herself carried her son for medicalexamination, not by the Medical Board, but by the AssociateProfessor of the Orthopedic Department. The report is tenderedto the Petitioner and the Zilla Parishad is not even aware that thePetitioner’s son underwent any such purported medicalexamination.7.In these peculiar facts and circumstances, we findthat the report of the Associate Professor cannot be relied upon,which has been served on the Petitioner through the MedicalSuperintendent of the said hospital. So also, such methodadopted by the Petitioner for getting her son examined, is not intune with the directions of this Court in the order dated24.02.2023 (supra). *6* 932y wp9211o248.In view of the above, this Writ Petition isdismissed.9.We direct the Chief Executive Officer, ZillaParishad, to place this order before the Dean of Sir J.J. Group ofHospitals, Mumbai. The Dean shall seek an explanation from theconcerned Associate Professor and the Medical Superintendent,as regards the locus of the Associate Professor, to examine theson of the Petitioner. Considering the signature of the AssociateProfessor, our impression is that his name is Ankit. Forconvenience, the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, wouldplace the copy of the said communication dated 28.12.2023,addressed by the Associate Professor, Orthopedic Department, tothe Medical Superintendent of the said hospital. The Dean shallcall for an explanation from both these officers and consideringtheir explanation, further course of action may be adopted by theDean as may be permissible as per the service conditionsapplicable to these two officers. kps (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)