Madras High Court
K.Kanagaraj vs Union Of India on 16 November, 2021
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 16.11.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014
and
W.M.P(MD)No.19436 of 2018
K.Kanagaraj ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Union of India,
Represented by its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block, New Delhi – 1.
2.The Director General,
ITBP Force, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Directorate General, ITBP,
Block No.2, C.G.O. Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
3.The Director (Meical),
ITBP Force, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Directorate General, ITBP,
Block No.2, C.G.O. Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
4.The Deputy Inspector General (Org),
ITBP Force, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Directorate General, ITBP,
Block No.2, C.G.O. Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/11
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
5.D.S.Nandish
6.Shoorveer Singh
7.Nagendra Kumar Singh
8.Manohar Lal
9.Satya Dev
10.Ravinder Kumar
11.Jashpal Singh
12.Rita Kaur
13.Ram Kumar
14.Satish Kumar
15.Jitender
16.Bhupendra Singh Yadav
17.Kastuba Nand Pant
18.Sushil Kumar Dubey
19.Avijit Maji
20.Himmat Singh
21.Hemant Singh
22.Radhey Lal Pal
23.Rajkumar
24.Vijay Kumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/11
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
25.Kharakram
26.B.Rajesh
27.Th.Romesh Singh
28.Dodisapna Ben
29.M.Madhusoodhanam
30.Ramakrishnan
31.Anoop Bala
32.Y.Govind Rao
33.S.Devasagayam
34.K.Anil
35.Uday Kumar
36.Balbir Singh
37.Mustaq Ahamad
38.Ashok Kumar Mishra
39.Devanand Prajapati
40.K.Manilla Hussain
41.Kanchan Singh
42.Bhoi Pinal Kumar
43.Rajeev Kumar Pandey
44.Harender Singh
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/11
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
45.Bali Thakur
46.Rajender Singh
47.Arjun Singh
48.Pratap Singh
49.S.Vijayakumaran
50.C.Rajaram
51.Sunil Sharma
52.Pitamber Joshi
53.Rajeev Kumar
54.Chandra Bhusan
55.Vikarm Singh
56.Brijesh Singh
57.Narender Singh
58.Surender Singh
59.Mohd Tanvir Khan
60.Manju Karki
61.A.Shyam Chandra
62.Brij Pal Sharma
63.Pramod Kumar Tomar
64.Asha Devi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4/11
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
65.Prakash Singh
66.Rajendran Nair
67.Brij Raj Pal
68.Tapak Rime
69.Sandeep Chand
70.C.Anand
71.Parveen Singh Negi
72.Palzor Wanchok Kazi
73.Devi Singh
74.Shakti Lal
75.Gajendra Singh
76.Ajay Kumar Nayak ... Respondents
(R5 to R76 are impleaded vide Court order
dated 17.02.2020 in W.M.P(MD)No.2639
of 2020 in W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014)
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the
files of the fourth respondent pertaining to its order bearing number
1–45024/31/2009 Organisation dated 18.10.2013 and to quash the same
and consequently, direct the respondents to extend the benefits of nursing
allowance on par with nursing assistants of Assam Rifles.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5/11
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
For Petitioner : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh
For Respondents : Mr.K.R.Laxman,
for R1 to R4.
ORDER
The petitioner is working as a Commandant of 45th
Battalion in Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force (ITBPF), Idayapatti Camp,
Amoor South, Madurai, Tamil Nadu. The petitioner is appointed as a
designated Medic and he is receiving Hospital Patient Care Allowance.
The petitioner is comparing himself with the Nursing Assistants of
Assam Rifles wherein, they will be paid allowance of Rs.150/- (Rupees
One Hundred and Fifty only).
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is
doing the same duty as that of the Nurses in the ITBP Hospital. He
would further submit that, they are assigned to maintain the proper
cleanliness in the hospital, viz, Medical Injection Room, sterilisation of
all dressing materials, instruments, equipments, etc., under the guidance
of senior Nursing Staff. Apart from that, the petitioner was assigned other
works like to keep record of daily OPD/Indoor Attendance and
consumption of medicine, assist the in-charge of stores or ward and other
section of the hospital, prepare patients for operation, laboratory test,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
radiography and other investigations, assisting in feeding and giving
drinking water, handling and observation of patients, dressing of wounds
and other nursing procedure, assisting in diagnostic and treatment
procedure, collecting and handling of pathological specimens and other
duties as specified therein. It is the specific claim of the petitioner that
these are the duties that are assigned to the Nurses also.
3. The respondents have filed a detailed counter. In paragraph 3(a)
of the counter, it is specifically stated that the Medics and Nurses are not
performing the same duties and the charter of duties for Nurses and
Medics as specified in ITBP Manual are entirely different and as per their
specified duties, Nurses and Medics are in different posts and grades and
different cadres.
4. The specific claim of R1 to R4, in paragraph 10 of the counter
affidavit, is that these Medics would be paid Special Hospital Patient
Care Allowance and the petitioner is already receiving the same.
5. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
6. The petitioner is seeking the Nursing Allowance that is being
granted to the Assam Rifles. The petitioner has relied on a judgment
passed in the High Court of Gauhati, in W.P(C)No.(SH)279 of 2009, and
has relied on paragraph 16 of the judgment. The issue in that Judgment is
that the Nursing Assistants are given a Special Allowance, therefore, the
similarly placed Assistant Matron, Sister Staff Nurse and AMN are
seeking the same allowance as that of the Nursing Staff. The High Court
of Gauhati has stated that the respondent authorities have made an
unreasonable classification to deprive them from the benefit, which they
are legally entitled to. In the present case the petitioner is comparing
“Medic” and “Nurses”. Since those two are different posts and the name
cannot be compared at all. Therefore the said judgment has no
application to the facts of the present case.
7. The claim of the petitioner comparing himself with the Assam
Rifles cannot be accepted for the reason, the Assam and the North-East
part of India have different topography, where travelling would be very
difficult. As per the ITBP category itself, service rendered in North-East
is “hard service”. So, there is no unreasonable classification.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
8. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for R1 to R4, the
petitioner is receiving another type of allowance, namely, Hospital
Patient Care Allowance, which the Assam Rifles are not getting. These
kind of allowances are within the domain of the Appointing Authorities.
Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, these issues cannot be
litigated. Therefore, this writ petition fails. However, if R1 to R4
considers it to be fit to grant such allowance, the respondents may
consider the same in accordance with law and this Court is not directing
the respondents to consider it positively.
9. With the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
16.11.2021
gbg/btr
Index :Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Note :In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be
utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the
copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy,
shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant
concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
To
1.Union of India,
Represented by its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block, New Delhi – 1.
2.The Director General,
ITBP Force, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Directorate General, ITBP,
Block No.2, C.G.O. Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
3.The Director (Meical),
ITBP Force, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Directorate General, ITBP,
Block No.2, C.G.O. Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
4.The Deputy Inspector General (Org),
ITBP Force, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Directorate General, ITBP,
Block No.2, C.G.O. Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
S.SRIMATHY, J.
gbg/btr
Order made in:
W.P(MD)No.4094 of 2014
and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014
and
W.M.P(MD)No.19436 of 2018
Dated:
16.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
