Madras HC upholds mass transfer of ESIC doctors, overturns CAT decision
Madras High Court
Chennai: Upholding the order issued by Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) to transfer doctors from the ESIC Medical College and Hospital in KK Nagar to other medical institutions, the Madras High Court overturned the Central Administrative Tribunal's (CAT) decision to quash the orders.
The issue began when 13 associate professors, appointed at the ESIC Medical College and Hospital in KK Nagar between 2011 and 2016, challenged their transfers issued in May 2023. The doctors argued that their preferences and personal or family concerns were not taken into account during the transfer process.
As a result, the aggrieved doctors approached the CAT which refused to grant any relief. They then moved to the Madras High Court, which directed the ESIC grievance redressal committee to review their representations and decide based on merit.
After the grievance redressal committee of ESIC rejected the doctors' plea to remain in the same institution, they sought relief from CAT, which quashed the transfer orders on May 16, 2024. ESIC then moved the High Court to challenge the tribunal’s intervention.
In its judgement, a division bench of Justices SM Subramaniam and M Jothiraman slammed the Tribunal for reconsidering the resolved issue and noted "The directions of the Tribunal, in our considered opinion, are beyond the scope of the legal position settled by the Constitutional Courts. Such directions issued in the matter of administrative transfers would undoubtedly result in prejudice to the interest of public administration, and the petitioners-ESIC may not be in a position to run an effective public administration."
Further, the bench remarked that "Once the Tribunal dismissed the original applications filed against the transfer orders and the High Court directed the grievance redressal committee to consider the representations. The committee then considered and rejected the representations, thereafter entertaining an application against the very same transfer order, thus issuing several directions as stated above "is excess exercise." Therefore, the court is not inclined to approve the orders impugned."
The court pointed out that the doctors, at the time of appointment, had accepted the transfer policy as part of their terms of employment and could not now challenge it after nine years of service, TNIE reports.
Additional Solicitor General ARL Sundaresan, representing ESIC, argued that the doctors had given an undertaking that they would abide by the conditions of appointment which included serving anywhere in the country. Therefore, he said that CAT could not reconsider the matter as it was already considered and ordered.
Senior counsel P Wilson, appearing for the respondent doctors, stated that "The doctors were appointed on an institution basis and therefore, they were not liable to be transferred to any other place or post. The grievance redressal committee, while reconstructing the transfers based on the representation, failed to follow the procedures as per the transfer guidelines which elaborately provide procedures for annual general transfer. The grievance redressal committee has not assigned any reason for rejecting the representations of the respondents."
Considering both sides, the bench allowed the petition filed by the Director General of ESIC challenging the orders of the CAT passed on May 16, 2024, and overturned the CAT's decision to quash the orders.
Also read- TN Health Minister visits Paramkudi Government Hospital, Transfers CMO over improper management
