LexCONFEDERATION OF EX-SERVICEMEN ASSOCIATIONS AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A CONFEDERATION OF EX-SERVICEMEN ASSOCIATIONS AND ORS. v UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. AUGUST 22, 2006 B [Y.K. SABHARWAl, CJ., K.G. BALAKRJSHNAN, S.H. KAPADIA, C.K. THAKKERAND P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, JJ.J Constitution of India, 1950: C Articles 14 and 21-Full and free medical aid for in-service defence personnel/Government employees-Not extended to ex-service defence personnel-Reasonableness of classification--Held: reasonable since two categories of employees form different class and cannot be said to be similarly situated-There is, no violation of Article 14 if they are treated differently- D Likewise, classification between defence personnel and other than defence personnel is also reasonable and valid-Doctrine of legitimate expectation also not applicable as there was no withdrawal or revocation of medical services of ex--servicemen. Articles 14 and 21-Writ filed by ex-servicemen for direction to E Government to provide free and full medicare to them, their families/ dependents-Government introduced Ex-servicemen Contributory Health Scheme, 2002 (ECHS)-Challenge to--On the ground that right to medical aid is fundamental right hence asking ex-servicemen to pay contribution amount for getting medical benefits is violative of such rights-Held: Asking ex-servicemen to pay contribution neither violates Part Ill nor Part IV of the F Constitution--Getting free and full medical facilities is not a part of fundamental right of ex-servicemen--Ex-servicemen who are getting pension may become. members of ECHS by making 'one time contribution' of reasonable amount (ranging from Rs. l,8001- to Rs.18,000/-)-This cannot be held illegal or unreasonable-However, defence personnel during their youth G had put their lives to high risk and improbabilities- They, therefore, are entitled to privileged treatment-As a mark of respect and gratitude, they must be provided medical services after retirement-On facts, respondent- Government directed either to waive the amount of contribution or to pay such amount on behalf of ex-servicemen who intend to avail medical benefits under the said scheme. H 872 r ,, CONFEDERATION OF EX-SERVICEMEN ASSOCJA TJONSv. U.0.1. 873 Article I 4-Test of permissible classification-Discussed. Article 2 I-Free and full medical facilities-Held: ls not a fundamental right guaranteed by Part JJJ or Part JV of the Constitution. Article 32-Public interest litigation-Writ Petition seeking direction A to the Government to recognize the right of full and free medicare of ex- B servicemen and their families-Maintainability of, when filed by Confederation of individually registered Associations of ex-servicemen-Held, Maintainable-Petitioner-Confederation representing those Associations, which is also registered, has locus standi to file the petition-Moreso, since larger public issue and cause is involved in the Writ petition. Doctrines: Doctrine of 'legitimate expectation'-Applicability of c The Petitioner-Association, a Confederation of five Ex-servicemen Associations filed PIL under Article 32 of the Constitution before this Court D for an appropriate writ directing the Respondent-Union of India to take necessary steps to ensure that full and free medicare is provided to ex-service defence personnel, their families and dependents on par with in-service defence personnel and to extend such medicare for all diseases including serious and terminal diseases, even if treatment for those diseases is not available at E Military Hospitals. The grievance of petitioner is that although they have a valuable right of full and free medicare, which is a fundamental right guaranteed by Part III as also covered by Directive Principles in Part IV of the Constitution, no concrete and effective steps had been taken by the respondents which constrained them to approach this Court; that such facilities are provided to Government employees and retired employees and F therefore refusal to extend similar medical benefits to ex-defence personnel is arbitrary, discriminatory, unreasonable and violative of A11icles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The Respondent contended that the Petitioner-Associations were not registered associations and therefore had no locus standi to file the Writ G Petition. On merits, it contended that full and free medical aid for ex- servicemen cannot be claimed as a matter of right. It has never been claimed for more than fifty years of independence
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.