Central Administrative Tribunal, Delhi
17
November 2022
Doctors/Medical
Officers in Employees’ State Insurance Corporation are entitled to continue in
service up to 65 years – Central Administrative Tribunal, Delhi
Dr.
R.B. Gupta was appointed as Insurance Medical Officer (Grade-II) by the
Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) on 26.05.1992.
On
31.08.2022, Dr. Gupta was retired by the ESIC on attaining 62 years of age. In
terms of the Order dated 30.12.2016, passed by the ESIC, a medical officer is
entitled to continue in service up to 65 years of age.
Being
aggrieved, Dr. Gupta filed an Original Application [OA No. 3357/2022] before
the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi.
Vide
Order dated 17.11.2022, the Tribunal directed the ESIC as under: -
“6.
Although there is no representation on behalf of the respondents, after careful
consideration of the issue involved in the present OA and the relevant
rules/notification/circular governing the issue at hand, we consider it
appropriate to dispose of this OA, at this initial stage. Circular dated
30.12.2016, issued by the ESIC and signed by one Director (Med. Admn.) is
crystal clear and conclusively states that the age of superannuation of medical
officers stands enhanced from the existing 62 years to 65 years with immediate
effect. Once the ESI Corporation, by its own order, has enhanced the age of
retirement of the doctors to 65 years without any rider or condition or proviso
whatsoever, there is no cause for them to now issue order of retirement of the
applicant on attaining the age of 62 years as that is no longer the age of
superannuation. Moreover, the amendment to the Fundamental Rules (FR) also
gives option to the concerned Medical Officer to seek enhancement of age from
62 years to 65 years. The only power vested with the Competent Authority, under
the FR’s, is to decide such an option on the basis of expertise and experience.
In case of the Medical Officer, who is professionally qualified and has worked
for a period of years, the experience and expertise can be determined only on
the basis of testimonials.
7.
Therefore, in our considered view, the respondents are required to re-visit
their order and review it strictly in accordance with the rules and instructions
governing the subject specifically their own order dated 30.12.2016 bearing
No.A-40/11/13/1/2016-Med.VI., read with amendment to FR’s. The competent
authority amongst the respondents after such a review shall pass appropriate
order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.
5.
OA stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.”
[Dr.
R. B. Gupta Vs. Employees’ State Insurance Corporation & Ors., O.A. No. 3357/2022,
Decided on – 17.11.2022, Central Administrative Tribunal, Delhi]
https://advocateanujaggarwal.com/home.php
Anuj Aggarwal
Advocate
D-26/A, First Floor, Jangpura Extension,
New Delhi - 110014
483, Block-2, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi-110003
Mobile – 9891403206
Landline – 011 - 35554905
Email – anujaggarwal1984@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment