LARSGESS scheme not applicable to medically decategorized staff absorbed into substantive, non-safety posts.

The applicant, P. Sangili, while working as a Pointsman under Southern Railways, was medically decategorized and absorbed in a supernumerary post of Caretaker (Running Room) on 04.06.2009.

He did not join this post.

Subsequently, at his request, he was posted against a regular vacancy of Peon to Traffic Inspector via an Office Order dated 07.10.2009, and he joined this post on 20.10.2009.

On 25.06.2015, the applicant applied for voluntary retirement and sought appointment for his son on medical decategorization under the Liberalised Active Retirement Scheme for Guaranteed Employment for Safety Staff (LARSGESS) Scheme.

The respondent authorities rejected his request stating that the supernumerary post created in his favor had already been wiped out due to his regular appointment as Peon from 11.08.2011.

The respondents further stated that the LARSGESS Scheme itself had been terminated and upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court in WP (C) No. 1407 of 2019 dated 28.01.2021.

Whether the impugned order rejecting the applicant's request for voluntary retirement and sympathetic appointment for his son under the LARSGESS Scheme was valid.

Whether the applicant was eligible for benefits under the LARSGESS Scheme, given his absorption into a regular post and the scheme's termination.

The court considered the nature of a supernumerary post, which is a temporary, non-duty bearing position created to accommodate an employee in personam and is automatically abolished when the holder retires, resigns, or is absorbed in a substantive post.

The court also applied the principles governing the Liberalised Active Retirement Scheme for Guaranteed Employment for Safety Staff (LARSGESS), noting its purpose of reducing safety risks and its specific cut-off date of 01.01.2015 for eligibility.

Furthermore, the court acknowledged the termination of the LARSGESS Scheme and its upholding by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which observed that the scheme facilitated a "backdoor entry" contrary to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

The court found that the applicant was medically decategorized in 2007 and subsequently absorbed into a substantive post of Peon on 20.10.2009, with the supernumerary post created for him being wiped out by 11.08.2011.

The court reasoned that the applicant's application for voluntary retirement on 25.03.2015 came with a significant delay of about six years after his decategorization and well after his absorption into a regular post.

The court highlighted that if the applicant intended to seek voluntary retirement due to medical decategorization, he should have applied between 2007 and 2009, or at the very latest, by 11.08.2011, when the supernumerary post ceased to exist.

The court further determined that the applicant was ineligible for the LARSGESS Scheme because he already held a regular alternative appointment as Peon, which was not covered by the scheme, and he was above 57 years of age on the scheme's cut-off date of 01.01.2015.

Critically, the LARSGESS Scheme itself had been terminated, and this termination was upheld by the Supreme Court, rendering any claim under it unenforceable.

Therefore, the respondent authorities could not be blamed for the applicant's delayed action and his ineligibility.

The impugned order rejecting his request was upheld because he was not eligible for the LARSGESS Scheme due to his absorption into a regular post, his age on the cut-off date, the significant delay in his application, and the subsequent termination of the LARSGESS Scheme itself.

The OA was dismissed as devoid of merits.