Revelli Ramana Chary v. The Chairman And Managing Director,

[ 3384 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION NO: 29090 OF 2018 Between:

Revelli Ramana Chary, S/o Lingaiah E.C. No. 02765630, Aged about 59 years, Occ.Coal Cutter, RK-B lncline,Srirampur Area, Singareni Collieries Company Limited, R/o 581-2, lndaram, Jaipur, Adilabad District.. ...PETITIONER AND

1. The Chairman and Managing Director, Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Singareni Bhavan, Read Hils, Hyderabad.,'

2. The Director (PA and W), the Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), Kothagudem, Kammam District.

3. The General Manager (Personnel), Welfare and CSR, the Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), Welfare Wing, Corporate Personnel Department, Singareni Bhavan, Hyderabad.

4. The Corporate Medical Board, Rep., by its Chief Medical Officer, the Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), Kothaguem, Bhadadri Kothagudem District.

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction and more particularly one in the nature of writ of t\/andamus declaring that the acts, deeds and things of the Respondents in not referring the Petitioner to the 4th Respondent for Medical Examination is illegal, arbitrary and violative of rights guaranteed by the constitution of lndia,

against to the lvlines Act 1952 and its Rules 1955 and National Coal Wages Agreement (NCWA).

lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Seclion 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to conduct lVledical Examination on the petitioner, pending disposal of the omit petition in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 direct the Registry of this Honble Court to post W.p. No. 29090 of 2018, as the same is covered in terms of the order passed by this Honble Court in W.p. No. 15025 of 2020, dated 8.9.2O2O, in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. CH VENKAT RAMAN Counsel for the Respondents: P SRI HARSHA REDDY (SC FOR SINGARENI coLLtERTES Co.LTD) The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI 1VRIT PETITION No.29O9O OF 2018 ORDER:

Mr. Ch. Venkat Raman, learned counsel lor the petitioner.

Mr. P.Harsha Reddy, learned Standing Counsel lor the respondents.

2. This writ petition is filed seeking the follou,ing reiief:

"to issue a r'rit order or direction and more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the acts deeds and things of the Respondents in not referring the Petitioner to the 4th Respondent for Me d ical Examination is illegal, arbitrary and violativc of rights guaranteed by thc Constitution of India against to the Mines Act, 1952 and its Rules, 1955 and National Coal Wages Agreement (NCWA) and to pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the subject matter/issue involvecl in the present writ petition is identical to the

.lAK..l W.P.No.l9090 ol'3018 subject matter/issue in W.P.No.4035 1 of 2018 & batch, that by common order dated 19.L2.2O23. this Court disposed of the u,rit petition 4.

For reasons alike, as stated in the common order. dated 19.12.2023, in W.P.No.40351 ol 2O18 & batch and in terms thereof, this Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if anv, in this Writ Petition shali stand closeC.

SD/-V.KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGISTAAR / \,\\, \\\ SECTION OFFICER To, //TRUE COPY//

1. The Chairman and Managing Director, Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Singareni Bhavan, Read Hils, Hyderabad. At Telangana.

2. The Director (PA and W), the Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), Kothagudem, Kammam District. At. Telangana.

3. The General Manager (Personnel), Welfare and CSR, the Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), Welfare Wing, Corporate Personnel Department, Singareni Bhavan, Hyderabad. At Telangana.

4. The Corporate Medical Board, Rep., by its Chief t\/edical Officer, The Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), Kothaguem, Bhadadri Kothagudem District. At Telangana.

5. One CC to SRl. CH VENKAT RAMAN Advocate [OPUC]

6. One CC to SRl. P SRI HARSHA REDDY (SC FOR SINGARENI COLLIERIES CO.LTD) Advocate IOPUC]

7. Two CD Copies

8. One Spare CoPY.

9. Annex Copy of Common Order, Dated 19-12-2023, WP 40351 of 2018 and batch ) GMN MR

HIGH COURT DATED: 2911212023 -\- j .'i 1, rr'

,,| ,1,, ii :11 i,;* 1g I n t/ I \. . !1-, .,.7"6r-\)y'

ORDER

WP.No.29090 of 2018 DISPOSING OIi TIIE WRI'I' I'E'I-ITI()\ \\'t'l tlou'l ( '( )s'l s tr$ ?A q \

THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI IIRIT PETITION Nos. 40351, 40801, 4O83O, 40868, 40873, 4t247, 42132, 42435, 426a4, 42728, 42769, 42770, 42776, 42777, 427a5, +2808, 42460, 43127, 43146, 43240, 43332, 43336, 43363, 43434, 44O2O, 44022, 4456a,46595, 46680, 4677s, 46805, 46a26, 46966, 4746a, 4749a, 47568, 4757+, 47650, 476a2, 4769L, 47457, 47868, 48OO9, 40649, 46647 and 399O8 of2O18 COMMON ORDER:

In this. batch of writ petitions the issue is common, hence are being disposed of by a common order. Facts in writ petition No.40351 of 2O i8 are being considered. Prayer in 40351 of 2018 is as follows:

"to issue u.trit or direction more particularlg one in the nature more particularly of turit of Mandamus declaing the action of the respondents in issuing the circular uide reference No. CRP/ PER/ IR/ C/ OB 1 / 1 622, dated 17.10.201 1 in restricting the age of the petitioner to refer to the 4 ' respondent Medical Board as iLlegol arbitrary and consequentlg direct the respondents to refer the petitioner to the 4h respondent Medicctl Board ctnd declared as unfit for the seruice of the respondent compana as per Mines Ac| 1952 and its rules 1955 and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2.

Mr. Ch.Venkat Raman, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. P.Sri Harsha Reddy, learned Standing counsel for the Singareni Collieries Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'SCCL') for respondents.

3 .

Brief facts:

Petitioners are all employees in Singareni Collieries they were being treated in different hospitals (including area hospital at Karimnagar District) for various aihnents such as cardiac problems, eye problems and other health related issues. Certain guidelines were issued by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL) uid,e Circuiar No.CRP/PtrR llRlClOSl /1622, dated 17.1O.2011 regarding medical examination of the employees by the Corporate Medical Board. The main issue, which arises for consideration, is with respect to Clause I of Circular, dated L7.1O.2Ol1, which is as follows:

"the applications of the emplogees utho are hauing less than 2 gears of left ouer seruice as on date of putting up the application shall rtot be forunrded by the Mine/ Department itself."

3. 1. In this batch, petitioners are aggrieved by Clause I of Circular, dated 17 .lO .2O 1 I imposing a condition in restricting such of those employees having less than 2 years of left over service being referred to Corporate Medical Board as on date of putting up application. It is thr: grievance of

petitioners that this condition is illegal, arbitrary and consequently be directed to be referred to Corporate Medical Board 3 .2. ln all these writ petitions, interim directions were issued. One such interim direction in I.A.No.O1 of 2018 in W.P.No.47B46 of 2018 is as follorvs:

"Prima facie, clause (1) of the Circular dated

17. 1O.2O 1 1 issued bg the Singareni Collieries Compang Limited (SCCL) refusing to forward applications of emplogees uho haue less than tu-to

(2) years of left ouer seruice to the Corporate Med.ical Board uiolates Article 2 I of the Constitution of India.

Therefore, the said Circular to that extent shaLl stand suspended.

There shall be inteim direction as prayed for." 3 .3. Pursuant to interim directions, writ petitioners were subjected to medical examination and proceedings were issued by the Corporate Medical Board, that after medical examination, benefits due, to the petitioners were paid. 3.4. It is trite to take note of the fact that a circular dated 2l.Ol.2Ol9 was issued vide No.CRP IPER/IR/C/081/139, deleting Clause I of the earlier Circular, dated 17.10.201 1. In Circular dated 21.01.2OI9, it was stated that empioyees who completed 58 years of age and found medically unht

I were entitled for benelit(s) as per their eligibility 1l l accordance with the Office Memorandum datecl i7.05.2013, uide No.CRPIPtrRIIRIC/O81 ll1O2. Challenge in a1l these writ petitions is to Ciause I of Circular, dated 1'l.10.20i 1. 4.

Learned counsels made submissions as per the averments in affidavit of W.P.No.4O351 of 2018 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the petitioners are employees of Singareni Collieries Limited and are aggrieved by the restriction imposed vide circular dated 17. lO.2Ol1 and such restriction is illegal and arbitrary. The learned counsel relied on a judgment 1t-I W.A.No.1O80 ol 2017 and batch, dated 06.O9.2017 and contended that the facts ir-r the said case(s) are sirnilar to the facts in the instant case and submitted that similar direclions be issued. Learned counsel furtl-rer relied on judgment in W.A.No.477 of 2Ol3 for the proposition that the petitioners be referred to the Medical Board as directed by the Hon'ble Court in W.A.No.477 of 2013. Rt:liance is also placed on the order of a learned Single Judge lll W.P.No.29477 of 2023 for the proposition that lretitioners be

'\ examined by the Appellate Medical Board. It was further contended that SCCL has medical records of all the petitioners, hence, no physical examination is required. It is submitted that SCCL can always examine the records and arrive at the conclusion whether the petitioners are medically fit or not. It is further contended that law is dynamic in nature and has to suit evolving needs and requirements of the society and that in the present case facts need to be properly appreciated and relief be granted as prayed for.

5. 1. It is submitted by learned counsel that petitioners were suffering with various ailments such as Cardiac and other problems, for past few years, were being treated in various hospitals, including area hospital, Karimnagar' It is submitted that they made applications to refer their cases to the Corporate Medical Board, to avail voluntar5l retirement as per Circular issued in year 2016. It is contended that after issuance of Circular dated 17. 10.20 1 1, making applications for voluntary retirement was declared as illegal. It is further submitted that the respondents have knowledge about the

health issues/ problems of the petitioners atrd were rlot referring their cases to Medical Boarcl.

5.2. Il is submitted that Circular dated 17.1o.201i is against Mines Act, 1952 and Mines Rules, 1955, and that imposing conditions restricting for referring the cases to Medical Board is bad in law and that the right of employee to be examined by the Medical Board is taken aw:ry by the Circular. It is submitted that Mines Act is a welfare Act and the same has not been appreciated by the SCCL before issuance of the Circular.

6. learned Standing Counsel for the respondents supported the circular issued by SCCL. It is submitted that pursuant to interim directions, Medical Exat'ninertion u,as conducted for all the employees and appropriat c proceedings were issued by Corporate Medical Board. It is further submitted that subsequent to interim directions, another Circular was issued by the SCCL uide No.CRP/PER IIR/ClOBl /139, dated 2t.O7.2o79, deleting Clause I of the earlier Circular and that employees, who were medically unfit were entitled for benelits as per eligibility

prescrlbecl Offlce Memorandum 1n No.CRP/PER/IRlClOBl/11O2, dated 17.O5.2O13. It is also submitted that in view of the subsequent developments and withdrawal of Clause I ol circular, dated 17 .lO.2Ol1, no cause survives for adjudication and hence, all these writ petitions are liab1e to be dismissed 6.1. It is further contended by learned counsel for respondents that in similar matters, this Court passed final orders in a number of writ petitions and same orders be passed. It is contended that any deviation from such earlier orders have to be based on demonstration of new set of facts and circumstances, which are not lorthcoming in this batch of writ petitions. Hence, the contention of the petitioners counsel is not tenable as no new grounds have been put forth.

7.

Heard learned counsels, perused the record, Circulars issued and orders passed by learned Single Judge 1n W.P.No.41016 of 2OlB and batch.

S B. It is pertinent to note that reliance placed by learned counsel for petitioners on the order of the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 1O8O of 2017 , dated 06.09.2017 is misconceived. The Division Bench was dealing with an issue with regards to the certificates of fitness issued by the Doctors of SCCL and that such certificates were biased and that an opportunity must be given to the employees to undergo medical examination even though not entitled to such re-examination under Rule 29-J of the Mines Rules, 1955. This order does not come to the rescue of the writ petitioners.

8.1. Reliance placed on the order(s) in Writ Appeal No-477 of 2013, dated 17.06.2013 and W.P.No.29477 ot 2023 are misconceived. As the facts in the said cases are not similar to the facts in the instant case and hence not applicable. 9.

In this batch of writ petitions, the issue is similar to tl-re issue considered in W.P.No.41016 of 2O18 and batch and a learned Single Judge of this Court passed orclers on O4.O2.2O2O, this Court is not inclined to take a different v1ew. The learned Single Judge passed the following order:

"4. Illhile so. Cirrular No.CRP/PER/I R/C/081/ 1lg, dated 21.0t.2019, u'as is-vrcd deleting clatse (i) ql the Circulor' dated 17.10.2011. ht the said circular, it is also stated that the entployees who have compleled 58 veurs of age and v'ho are -firund to bc tnedicdly u4fit are e titled to the bencfit as pcr their eligibility in accordqnce v'ith Olfice Mentorandunr No.CRP/PER/|R/C/081/ I 102. dared 17.05.2013. A request has to be made b, all those emploS,ses to subject thent Jbr medical examinalion.

5. In view of the subsequent developments, withdrawing clause (i) of the Circular duted 17.10.2011, thc prayer soughr in tlrc writ petilions is alread-t, granted b;' Ilrc respondert - (:ompa '.

6. Learned counsel for lhe ltelitioners sttbntils tlwt ptu'suat lo the interim orders, all lhe petitioners were subiected to medicol examinution and in view thereoJ, the cause in the wril petitiotls does not survire for adjudication.

7. Recording, the said submission, lhe l{rit Pelilions are dismissed. There shall be no order us to costs. Pending Mi.scellaneou.s Petitions, if any, shall stand closed. "

10. It is agreed by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of petitioners and respondent organisation that, if any of the petitioners in the batch of writ petitions were not subjected to medical examination, such of those petitioners reserve the right to approach the proper Court/ Folam to seek directions and liberty is granted to such of those petitioners. In view of the statement made before this Court by the counsels, order(s) passed in W.P.No-41O16 of 2018 and batch are modifled to the extent of granting liberty to

l() only such of those petitioners, who were not subj ected to medical examination to take recourse as per liberty grar-rted For all other petitioners in this batch of writ petitions, the order(s) dated O4.O2.2O20 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.41016 of 2018 and batch, is applicable, as the facts are similar to the present batch of writ petitions This Court is not inciined to differ from the vir:rv taken as ir-r the order in W.P.No.41016 of 2018 ancl batch. clated 04.o2.2020 1 1. With the aforesaid observations, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stancl closed.

ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J Date: 19.12.2023 Plp Note: A copy ofordcr in W.P.No.4 1016 of 201 lt & Batch be annexed to this ordcr.

^ttt-