ORDER
B.H. Srikrishna, J.
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service through Counsel.
2. This is a classic case where human values are sought to be subordinated to “procedure”. The father of the petitioner was working as a Jeep Driver in the establishment of the first respondent with effect from 22-2-1963. Sometime in September 1988, the father of the petitioner suffered from severe schizophrenia as a result of which he was referred to the Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur. On 28th September 1988, the Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur issued a certificate expressing his opinion that the father of the petitioner was completely incapacitated for service on account of the mental illness (Chronic Schizopherenja). It is not really in dispute that the illness with which the father of the petitioner suffered at that time has continued till today and even today, the petitioner’s father is non compos mentis. It appears that someone in the office of the respondent, got an application typed and obtained signatures of the petitioner’s father in which it was purportedly stated that the father of the petitioner was taking voluntary retirement due to the demise of his wife and his responsibility to look after the children and also on account of his not keeping well. This application was processed and the petitioner’s father ceased to be in service.
3. The petitioner made an application on 12-7-1993 seeking employment on compassionate grounds by pointing out that his father has obtained retirement on 31st August 1989 due to madness while he was in the service of the Zilla Parishad. Since the retirement pension was insufficient for the maintenance of the family, and the family was virtually facing starvation, the petitioner sought employment on compassionate grounds. This application has been rejected by the reply dated 2-12-1995 on the ground that the petitioner’s father had not retired on medical grounds, but that his retirement was voluntary. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. At Annexure B to the petition is a letter addressed to the Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur by Dr. N.S. Bhosle, Medical Officer of the Zilla Parishad referring the case of the petitioner’s father to the Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur. In this letter, it was pointed out that the petitioner’s father Vishnu Namdeo Pawar who was under observation for about 10 months, was always under depression, talking irrelevantly, not well oriented and becoming violent frequently. The nature of the medication given to him is also described in this letter. It is also pointed that his job was one of jeep driver. The Medical Officer, tentatively, was of the opinion that Vishnu Namdeo Pawar (father of the petitioner) was mentally handicapped and unable to discharge his duties as jeep driver any more and unfit for duty. The Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur was requested to examine the patient and disqualify him for service and issue proper certificate. It was this reference which induced the Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur to examine the petitioner’s father.
5. Smt. Munshi, learned Counsel appearing for the Zilla Parishad vehemently argued that this was contrary to all procedural rules, that the said Medical Officer of the Zilla Parishad had no authority whatsoever to refer the case to the Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur without taking the approval of the Chief Officer of the Zilla Parishad and, therefore, all consequential certificates issued by the Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur are valueless.
6. We find it difficult to agree. We are not as much concerned with the procedure followed or not followed by the Medical Officer of the Zilla Parishad, as we are concerned with only state of mental competence of the petitioner’s father at the material time. There is a certificate dated 28th September 1988 (Annexure C to the petition) issued by the Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur in which the learned Doctor says “I/We consider Shri Vishnu Namdeo Pawar to be completely incapacitated for further services of any kind in consequence of his mental illness (Chronic Schizophrenia) in the department to which he belongs.”
Smt. Munshi does not challenge the certificate of the Medical Superintendent, Mental Hospital, Nagpur on any ground other than the ground that this has been obtained without following appropriate procedure. We think that procedure cannot take precedence over the health of a human being. In our view, irrespective of who referred the case to the Mental Hospital, if ultimately the competent doctor in the Mental Hospital examined the petitioner’s father and found him to be a chronic schizophrenic, and if the Medical Officer of the Zilla Parishad had observed him to be under a continuous state of depression (Chronic Schizophrenia), talking irrelevantly and resorting to frequent violence, we think that, notwithstanding all lapses of procedure, the petitioner’s father must be taken to have been mentally incompetent to carry out his duties. In the circumstances, we are inclined to accept the case of the petitioner that the letter obtained from the petitioner’s father can carry no weight. We are unable to accept the contention of the respondent that the petitioner’s father’s services came to an end by way of voluntary retirement. We are of the view that, despite the words used in the letter dated 2-12-1996 addressed by the Chief Executive Officer to the petitioner’s father, the petitioner’s father’s service must be deemed to have come to an end on account of his mental incompetence/mental illness to continue further in service. Thus, the petitioner’s case is squarely covered by the parameters of the Government Resolution dated 9-3-1985. Consequently, the rejection of the petitioner’s application on the ground that the petitioner’s father had opted for voluntary retirement is erroneous and is liable to be interfered with.
7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order of the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Bhandara, dated 2-12-1995 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the application made by the petitioner dated 13-12-1994 in accordance with the provisions of the Government Resolution dated 9-3-1985 and take appropriate decision in the matter with the requisite sympathy that is expected of them. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs. The respondents shall take their decision within a period of four weeks from today.
8. Petition allowed.