PGI doc’s retirement at 65 under CAT lens
Chandigarh, April 1
The Chandigarh Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has ordered to maintain status quo on the retirement of Dr Rakesh Sehgal, Dean (Academic) at PGI, who challenged the decision of the institute to retire him on reaching the age of 65.
Sehgal approached CAT through counsel KB Sharma with a prayer to issue a direction to the respondents (the PGI and the Ministry of Health) to allow him to continue in service till the age of 70 on the pattern of AIIMS and other medical institutes in the country.
Rashmi Saxena Sehgal, Member (Administrative), and Suresh Kumar Batra, Member (Judicial), passed the order on Dr Sehgal’s application, while issuing the notices to the respondents qua the interim relief for April 11 this year.
In the application, Sehgal sought directions to the respondents to allow him to continue in service till the age of 70 in term of “Teachers Eligibility Qualifications in Medical Institutions Regulations, 2022”.
Counsel KB Sharma also relied upon the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the matter of Dr Joginder Pal & others vs Union of India & others and various other relevant Rules. The counsel submitted that the applicant had filed a representation addressed to the PGI Director on March 14 this year, which was pending for consideration, and he was superannuating on March 31 at the age of 65.
The counsel also prayed for interim relief on the grounds that in case it was not granted and the application was succeeded finally, it would complicate the issue. On the other hand, the counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer for interim relief.
After hearing of the arguments, the tribunal observed, “We have also gone through the provisions of the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education Research, Chandigarh, Act, 1966, and the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, which prescribed 70 years as the retirement age. After considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and having heard the counsel for both sides, let notice be issued qua the interim relief also for April 11. Till the next date of hearing, status quo as on today shall be maintained. However, it is clarified that this order shall not be cited as precedence in future.”
