Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 649 (HP)

Man Dass v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2020-09-25

AJAY MOHAN GOEL

body2020
JUDGMENT Ajay Mohan Goel, J. - The controversy involved in this writ petition is in a very narrow compass. Additional Chief Secretary, Health to the Government of Himachal Pradesh issued an order dated 25.03.2020 (Annexure P-1) in exercise of powers vested in him under Clause-3 of the Himachal Pradesh Epidemic Disease (Covid-19) (Amendment) Regulations, 2020, to the effect that superannuation of all Medical Officers, Faculty Members and Para Medical Staff of all categories working under the Government of Himachal Pradesh in the Department of Health and Family Welfare and Medical Education & Research, who are due to retire on 31.03.2020, 30.04.2020 and 31.05.2020, shall be deemed to be deferred and extended upto 30.06.2020. 2. Petitioner, who was serving as Opthalmic Officer at CH Tegubehar, Block Jari, District Kullu and who was to superannuate on 31.05.2020, on attaining the age of superannuation, was relieved of his duties by the Block Medical Officer Jari, District Kullu, on 30.05.2020, vide Annexure P-2. 3. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has filed this petition with the prayer that relieving of the petitioner is illegal and in violation of order dated 25.03.2020, issued by respondent No.1 more so when persons similarly situated as the petitioner were given the benefit of the said order. 4. The stand of the State is that though order dated 25.03.2020 was issued which was followed by another orders dated 29.06.2020 and 29.08.2020, however, vide order dated 29.08.2020 (Annexure R-3) appended with the reply of the respondents, certain categories for the purpose of extension in service in view of COVID-19 Pandemic were included for the purpose of said extension and all categories were not included and the excluded categories also included the category of Opthalmic Officer. On these basis, contention of the State is that the petitioner is not entitled for any relief. 5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith. 6. As, I have already mentioned above, vide order dated 25.03.2020, the date of superannuation of Medical Officers as well as Para Medical Staff, who were to superannuate on 31.03.2020, 30.04.2020 and 31.05.2020, was deemed to be deferred and extended upto 30.06.2020. 6. As, I have already mentioned above, vide order dated 25.03.2020, the date of superannuation of Medical Officers as well as Para Medical Staff, who were to superannuate on 31.03.2020, 30.04.2020 and 31.05.2020, was deemed to be deferred and extended upto 30.06.2020. Thereafter, vide order dated 29.06.2020, which is appended with the reply filed by the respondents as Annexure R-2, the date of superannuation of Medical Officers as well as Para Medical Staff of all categories working under the Government of Himachal Pradesh in the Department of Health and Family Welfare and Medical Education & Research, who were to retire on 31.03.2020, 30.04.2020 and 31.05.2020, was extended and deferred upto 31.08.2020. This was followed by order dated 29.08.2020 (Annexure R-3), vide which the date of superannuation of the Para Medical Staff of the categories mentioned therein, which admittedly does not includes the category of Ophthalmic Officer, was deferred and extended utpo 31.10.2020. 7. Thus, it is evident from the three orders which were issued from time to time by the Government that vide earlier two orders whereas the date of superannuation of all Medical Officers and all Para Medical Staff were extended upto 30.06.2020 and then 31.08.2020, thereafter vide Annexure R-3, the date of superannuation of the Para Medical Staff categorically mentioned in order dated 29.08.2020, was extended upto 31.10.2020. 8. In these circumstances, when the date of superannuation of Para Medical Staff was deferred by the State Government expressly earlier upto 30.06.2020 and then after 31.08.2020, the act of the respondents of relieving the petitioner from duties on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2020, is arbitrary and in violation of orders dated 25.03.2020 as well as 29.06.2020. 9. This, I say so for the reason that when respondent No.1 in its wisdom, had deferred the age of superannuation of all Para Medical Staff, firstly upto 30.06.2020 and then upto 31.08.2020, then it was not open to the respondents to discriminate and adopt the policy of pick and choose while giving extension to Para Medical Staff. This observation is being made because it is the categorical stand of learned Counsel for the petitioner before this Court that petitioner was discriminated vis-a-vis similarly situated persons whose services were continued post the date of superannuation in terms of the orders issued by the State. 10. This observation is being made because it is the categorical stand of learned Counsel for the petitioner before this Court that petitioner was discriminated vis-a-vis similarly situated persons whose services were continued post the date of superannuation in terms of the orders issued by the State. 10. Accordingly, this petition is allowed by quashing order dated 30.05.2020 (Annexure P-2), vide which petitioner was relieved, with issuance of a mandamus to the respondents that the petitioner shall be deemed to have continued in service and superannuated as such on 31.08.2020, with all consequential benefits, however, with one caveat that the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of this judgment only if benefit of order dated 29.03.2020 as well as 29.06.2020 was given to even one of the Para Medical Staff in the State. Petition is disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.