Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajinder Parsad vs Haryana State And Ors on 2 May, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060989
2024:PHHC:060989
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
218
RSA-6708-2016 (O&M)
Decided on : 02.05.2024
Rajinder Parsad .....Appellant
Versus
Haryana State through Collector, Hisar and others .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR
Present : None for the appellant.
Mr. Ravi Dutt Sharma, D.A.G., Haryana.
NAMIT KUMAR, J. (Oral)
1. In pursuance to the order dated 15.02.2024, Transport
Commissioner, Haryana, Chandigarh is present in the Court.
2. That instant regular second appeal has been preferred by
the appellant/plaintiff impugning the judgment and decree dated
03.02.2016, passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hisar,
whereby the suit for injunction filed by the appellant/plaintiff was
dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 02.05.2016 passed by
learned Additional District Judge, Hisar, whereby the appeal preferred
by the appellant/plaintiff against judgment and decree dated 03.02.2016
was also dismissed. Parties to the lis are hereinafter shall be referred to
by their original position before the trial Court.
2. The appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory injunction
restraining the defendants to retire him from the service and to examine
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060989
2024:PHHC:060989
him from a Medical Board of P.G.I.M.S., Rohtak, so that he may take
benefits, as per the policy of Government.
3. Having lost before both the Courts below, the instant
regular second appeal has been preferred.
4. While issuing notice of motion on 22.02.2018, the
following order was passed :-
"Notice of motion.
On the asking of the court, Mr. Rohit Arya, AAG,
Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the official
respondents.
Learned counsel for the appellant is directed to
furnish 3 sets of paper-book to learned State counsel
during the course of the day.
Short question for consideration in the present
appeal is whether appellant is entitled to extension of
service from 58 years to 60 years with reference to his
disability read with Government instructions dated
21.04.2008. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted
that on 21.05.2014 he had submitted necessary application
to the competent authority to forward his application for
the purpose of obtaining disability certificate with the
medical board before his retirement i.e. 31.11.2014.
Concerned respondent has failed to obtain medical
certificate to the extent that 70% disability of the appellant.
The concerned respondent is hereby directed to file short
affidavit as to what action has been taken by the competent
authority in view of the appellant's application dated
21.05.2014 whether it has been sent to Medical Board? If it
is so what action has been taken before 31.11.2014 be
made known in the affidavit.
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060989
2024:PHHC:060989
List this matter on 17.05.2018."
5. The learned State counsel submits that the appellant has
unfortunately died on 31.12.2021 and placed on record a copy of his
death certificate, which is taken on record.
6. Short reply by way of an affidavit of Mangal Sain, HCS,
General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Hisar, on behalf of the
respondents, has been filed in the Registry which is taken on record. In
the said reply, it has been stated as under :-
"xx xx xx xx xx
3. That the appellant submitted an application dated
21.05.2014, wherein he requested to refer his case to the
Medical Board for issuance of medical certificate to the
extent of 70% disability of the appellant.
4. That the answering respondents vide memo
No.1420/ECM dated 04.06.2014 requested the appellant to
obtain certificate of 70% disability from P.G.I.M.S. Rohtak
(Copy of letter annexed as annexure R-1) so that his case
regarding extension of service would be forwarded to the
competent authority for taking decision. The appellant
neither appeared before the said medical board for
issuance of necessary disability certificate nor submitted
any disability certificate showing that he is suffering from
70% or more disability. Therefore, he was not granted two
year extension in service as per Govt. notification dated
21.04.2008 (Copy of Govt. notification annexed as
annexure R-2).
xx xx xx xx xx"
7. No one had put in appearance on behalf of the appellant on
the last date of hearing i.e. 15.02.2024. Even today also there is no
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060989
2024:PHHC:060989
representation on behalf of the appellant and his LRs have also not been
brought on record.
8. Since neither the appellant appeared before the Medical
Board for issuance of necessary disability certificate nor submitted any
disability certificate to the authorities showing that he is suffering from
70% or more disability, in terms of memo dated 04.06.2014, therefore,
he was not granted two years extension of service in terms of
notification dated 21.04.2008. Moreso, he has unfortunately expired on
31.12.2021 on attaining the age of 65 years.
9. In this view of the matter, finding no merit in the instant
appeal, the same is hereby dismissed.
10. Pending application, if any, shall stands disposed of
accordingly.
(NAMIT KUMAR)
02.05.2024 JUDGE
Kothiyal
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
