[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Employees’ State Insurance ... vs Samunder Singh on 15 December, 2025
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:96701
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
AGAINST THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 28.11.2025 IN OA NO.556 OF 2025 OF CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH
PETITIONER/S:
1 EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION
REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE
CORPORATION, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, CIG ROAD, PIN - 110001
2 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
EMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, CIG ROAD,
PIN - 110001
3 THE CHAIRMAN OF STANDING COMMITTEE
E.S.I CORPORATION SHRAM SHAKTI BHAVAN, RAFI MARG (SOCIAL SECURITY
DIVISION), PIN - 110001
4 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
ESTABLISHMENT BRANCH 1, E.S.I CORPORATION, PANCHDEEP BHAVAN, C.I.G MARG,
NEW DELHI, PIN - 110002
5 THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR
ESI CORPORATION REGIONAL OFFICE, PANCHDEEP BHAWAN, NORTH SWARAJ ROUND,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680020
BY ADVS.
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:96701
SHRI.T.V.AJAYAKUMAR
KUM.RIMJU P.H.
SHRI.JOTHIS CHACKO
RESPONDENT/S:
SAMUNDER SINGH
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O.PRAHALAD, SOCIAL SECURITY OFFICER, E.S.I CORPORATION, REGIONAL OFFICE,
NORTH SWARAJ ROUND, THRISSUR - 680001, HAVING PERMANENT RESIDENCE AT
VPO MEHRA, CHARKHI, DADRI, HARYANA, PHONE- 8860263005, PIN - 127026
BY SRI ELVIN PETER (SR) ASSISTED BY SRI K.R. GANESH
THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:96701
JUDGMENT
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.
The present Original Petition filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India challenges the interim order dated 28.11.2025
passed in Original Application No. 556 of 2025 by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, whereby the Tribunal
stayed the operation of Annexure A9 and directed the petitioners to
permit the respondent to continue till the next posting date.
2. The petitioners herein were the respondents in the Original
Application, whereas the respondent herein was the applicant in the
Original Application.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent was
appointed on an ad hoc basis to the post of Lower Division Clerk in the
first petitioner-Corporation as per order dated 16.01.1995. Thereafter,
he was regularised upon passing the departmental examination held on
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
2025:KER:96701
10.03.2009. The respondent was promoted to the post of Upper Division
Clerk with effect from 01.02.2011 and was further promoted as Assistant
with effect from 15.07.2015. Subsequently, the respondent was promoted
as Social Security Officer (SSO) with effect from 06.05.2021. At present,
he is working in the said capacity.
3.1 While working as Branch Manager of ESI Hospital, Manesar,
Haryana, the respondent was issued a charge memorandum dated
20.07.2021. The allegation against the respondent was that he barged
into the office of the Deputy Director and engaged in arguments with
some officials, using abusive language. Consequently, disciplinary
proceedings were initiated against him under the provisions of the CCS
(Conduct) Rules, 1964. Thereafter, the respondent was suspended from
service with effect from 09.11.2021. Subsequently, he was transferred
and posted to the ESI Corporation, Regional Office, Thrissur, Kerala, vide
order dated 29.06.2022. The suspension was revoked as per order dated
20.06.2022, and the respondent was reinstated in service thereafter.
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
2025:KER:96701
3.2 In the meanwhile, the second petitioner-Director General
issued a show-cause notice/order dated 26.08.2025, asking the
respondent why the power conferred under Rule 56(j) of the
Fundamental Rules should not be invoked to prematurely retire him
from service with effect from 28.11.2025 or on the day following the
expiry of a three-month notice period, as he had already attained the
age of 55 years. The said premature retirement was recommended based
on two disciplinary proceedings initiated against the respondent.
4. Being aggrieved, the respondent filed an Original Application
before the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the
impugned interim order dated 28.11.2025, admitted the Original
Application, stayed the operation of Annexure A9, and directed the
petitioners to permit the respondent to continue in service till the next
posting date.
5. Aggrieved by the interim order, the petitioners have filed the
present Original Petition, inter alia, contending that the Tribunal could
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
2025:KER:96701
not have stayed the order of premature retirement contained in
Annexure A9, as doing so amounts to granting final relief. Moreover,
without providing the petitioners an opportunity to file a reply in the
Original Application and without obtaining detailed instructions on the
matter, the Tribunal stayed the operation of Annexure A9, which
adversely affects the petitioners' defence and results in a miscarriage of
justice.
5.1 The petitioners have wide powers to invoke the provisions of
Rule 56(j) of the Fundamental Rules, as the employer is entrusted with
the discretion to assess efficiency or ineffectiveness beyond a prescribed
age, and the limitations of judicial intervention in such matters are well
recognized. Therefore, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to stay Annexure
A9. There is sufficient evidence to show that the respondent had
rendered himself a liability to the Institution, and hence, there was no
occasion for the Tribunal to interfere. On these grounds, the petitioners
seek setting aside of the impugned interim order.
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
2025:KER:96701
6. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the respondent
vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that two disciplinary
proceedings are already ongoing in respect of the charges levelled
against the respondent. Therefore, invoking the provisions of Rule 56(j)
of the Fundamental Rules at this stage and retiring the respondent
prematurely is illegal. If the premature retirement order is allowed to
stand, the very purpose of initiating the two separate disciplinary
proceedings under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 would be
rendered futile, as no further punishment could be imposed on the
respondent. The petitioners have also not placed on record any decision
of the appropriate authority indicating that such premature retirement
was in the public interest. The respondent is, therefore, being subjected
to premature retirement without due justification.
6.1 The learned Counsel further submitted that this Court should
not invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution,
as there is no apparent error on the face of the record and the impugned
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
2025:KER:96701
order is only an interim order that does not decide the matter finally.
Consequently, the Original Petition is liable to be dismissed.
7. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the
records.
8. Admittedly, two separate disciplinary proceedings are
pending against the respondent. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that
the respondent had been prematurely retired by invoking Rule 56(j) of
the Fundamental Rules read with Regulation 7(4) and Regulation 24 of
the ESIC (Staff and Conditions of Service) Regulations, 2023, which, prima
facie, indicates punitive termination. Consequently, the operation of
Annexure A9 was stayed, and the petitioners were directed to permit the
respondent to continue in service till the next posting date. The matter
was listed for hearing today, i.e., 15.12.2025. In such circumstances, we
decline to invoke jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Accordingly, we find no merit in the Original Petition, which is
hereby dismissed at the admission stage itself. However, having regard
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
2025:KER:96701
to the fact that the matter was listed for hearing today, i.e., 15.12.2025,
we request the Tribunal to take up the Original Application on a nearest
day, in accordance with law. Any observations made in this judgment
shall not stand in the way of the Tribunal in deciding the Original
Application on its own merits.
Sd/-
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
JUDGE
Sd/-
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
JUDGE
jjj
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
2025:KER:96701
APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure -A9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A-40/11/REVIEW/FR 56(J)/2024-E.1
(CN-1028216) DATED 26.08.2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO
THE APPLICANT.
Annexure -A13 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.216 OF 2025 DATED 24.09.2025 ISSUED BY
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DECLARING THAT THE APPLICANT SINCE
ATTAINED THE AGE OF 55 YEARS SHALL RETIRE FROM SERVICE ON
28.11.2025.
Annexure -A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO. 13.C/14/11/17/.2018-
VIG./1147 DATED 20.7.2021 TOGETHER WITH STATEMENT OF
IMPUTATION OF MISCONDUCT ISSUE AGAINST THE APPLICANT.
Annexure -A2 TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER NO. C-14015/58/2024- VIG./ 162
DATED 27.2.2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DIRECTOR
GENERAL.
Annexure -A3 TRUE COPY OF APPEAL SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT THROUGH
PROPER CHANNEL BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHAIRMAN, 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 17.3.2025.
Annexure -A4 TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER NO. C-12/18/13/120/2021-
VIG./1529 DATED 9.11.2021 ISSUED AGAINST THE APPLICANT
Annexure -A5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION F.NO. PT.C-12/18/13/120/2021-
VIG. DATED 29.6.2022 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (VIG.) OF THE
ESI CORPORATION, NEW DELHI TO THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, ESI
CORPORATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, KERALA.
Annexure -A6 TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION REVOCATION NO. PT.C-12/18/13/120-
2021-VIG. DATED 20.6.2022.
Annexure -A7 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE MEMO NO.54-C.12.11.01.2022-ADM(SS)
DATED 20.7.2022 TOGETHER WITH ARTICLES OF IMPUTATIONS OF
MISCONDUCT, SLIT OF DOCUMENTS AND LIST OF WITNESSES ISSUED
AGAINST THE APPLICANT.
Annexure -A8 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER NO.54-CD.12.11.01.2022-
ADM(SS) DATED 10.5.2023 WHICH WAS ATTACHED ALONG WITH
ANNEXURE-A7 MEMO OF CHARGES ISSUED TO THE APPLICANT.
Annexure -A10 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF RTI APPLICATION DATED
2.9.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT.
Annexure -A11 TRUE COPY OF THE RTI REPLY NO.54-Z.12/14/CPIO/2025-RTI
(02706/2025) DATED 6.10.2025.
Annexure -A12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 10.9.2025 SUBMITTED UNDER RTI
ACT.
OP (CAT) NO. 147 OF 2025
2025:KER:96701
Annexure- A14 TRUE COPY OF APPEAL (WITHOUT EXHIBITS) DATED 25.9.2025
SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY
Exhibit 1 TRUE COPY OF OA NO.556/25 FILED BY 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE
HON'BLE CAT ERNAKULAM.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELIEVING ORDER F.NO 54.A.20/11/1802/2021-
ADM DATED 27/11/25 OF THE RESPONDENT ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL
DIRECTOR
Exhibit P3 OFFICE MEMORANDUM NO. 25013/03/2019-ESTT.A-IV DATED
28/08/2020 ISSUED BY DOPT OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Exhibit P4 ORDER NO. A-40/11/4/3(2).2025-ESTT.I DATED 4/11/2025 ISSUED BY
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, ESIC
Exhibit P4( a) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF EXT.P4 ORDER BY THE RESPONDENT DATED
4/11/25
Exhibit P5 INTERIM ORDER DATED 28/11/25 PASSED BY THE CAT ERNAKULAM IN
OA NO.556/25 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.
