Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1991 (4) TMI 437

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... P. State Road Transport Corporation Employees (Other than officers) Service Regulations, 1981 ( the Regulations ). The respondents were appointed as drivers in the erstwhile U.P. Government Roadways. Upon the formation of the U.P.State Road Transport Corporation ( Corporation ) they were absorbed in the services of the Corporation. The Corporation has framed the Regulations inter alia prescribing medical test to drivers every year for the purpose of assessing their suitability for the job. Pursuant to these Regulations, the Managing Director of the Corporation issued a circular dated December 19,1986 stating that all drivers should be medically examined and those found unsuitable either because of ill health or poor eye- sight, be not gi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e dispensed with: Provided that the persons, whose services are so dispensed with may, in the discretion of the Corporation, be offered alternative job. Regulation 17(2) requires that the drivers have to undergo medical test particularly vision test every year, or at such intervals as may be prescribed by the General Manager of the Corporation. Regulation 17(3) has two branches. The first branch provides power to the Corporation to remove the driver from the service who fails to pass the medical test. The second branch of Regulation 17(3) though styled as proviso also appears to be an independent branch. It is not proviso. The proviso ordinarily carves out an exception from the general rule enacted in the main provision. However, som .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at the retrenched driver has a statutory right to get an alternative job? Is it obligatory for the Corporation to offer an alternative job to the driver who is certified to be medically unfit for the driver s job? The High Court has expressed the view that the Corporation before terminating the service of a driver who fails to satisfy the medical test, is obliged to offer him an alternative job and that offer shall be in writing. In other words, the High Court seems to be of the opinion that the proviso to Regulation 17(3) imposes an obligation on the Corporation to offer an alternative job to all those who are found medically unfit to carry on their duties in the existing jobs. The view taken by the High Court appears to be fallacious. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... regulation requires it to exercise in individual cases of retrenchment. As earlier stated, the Managing Director has issued two circulars: (i) dated December 19, 1986 and (ii) dated March 12 1987 directing the Regional Managers to dispense with the services of the drivers who are found to be medically unfit to drive the vehicles. It is directed in the circulars that such drivers should be paid benefits like retrenchment compensation which they are entitled to under the U.P.Industrial Disputes Act. The circulars thus leave no scope for exercising discretion to consider the individual cases of retrenched drivers for any alternative job. It may be stated that the statutory discretion cannot be fettered by self-created rules or policy. Although .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... service within the resource use and allocation. It is within these constraints the Corporation has to exercise its discretion and perform its task. The second aspect relates to the manner in which the statutory discretion is to be exercised. The discretion allowed by the statute to the holder of an office, as Lord Halsbury observed in Sharp v. Wakefield, [1891] AC 173 at 179 is intended to be exercised according to the rules of reason and justice, not according to private opinion; according to law and not humor. It is to be, no arbitrary, vague and fanciful but legal and regular. And it must be exercised within the limits to which an honest man competent to the discharge of his office ought to confine himself. Every discretion conferred .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates