Well captured article for the benefit of professionals as well as the needy.
GOOD ARTICLE PUBLISHED.. VERY PROPOSE OF COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT IS TO GET SOME JOB TO SUSTAIN THE LIFE PROCESS IN FUTURE AND PROTECT THEIR LEFT BEHIND FAMILY MEMBER S.. CASE LAWS HAVE CHOSEN TO ENLIGHTEN ONE AND ALL.
see in JJ'a death issue, the issue is on compassionate ground for safety of JJ, but the hospitals obviously might have caused several medical or surgical negligences besides medial man ought to know how the 'issue of dehydration followed by simple fever' happened under what circumstances - like that hospital should see if there was any 'fall' accidentally or some one pushed her may be by error or otherwise, what we see today hospitals talk that they gave 'best possible treatment' not talking about why at all JJ shd face death bu the cardiac arrest , that happened after the hospital experts used some modern technology of keeping heart functioning for a certain period not more than 40 or 45 minutes but what happened was she was in artificial respiration much more than prescribed time limit that itself can be termed as surgical or medical negligence is obvious; if the TN govt drags its feet on white paper or investigation obviously it shows some obvious wrongs committed by some in Poes Garden , that cannot be ruled out by some 'fiat' as such, if some fiat takes place obvious it is the govt is in hands in Glouce with some one, else what prevents it to face judicial probe; judicial probe is the ultimate 'compassionate mechanism ' under welfare legislation, if the welfare legislation under Part IV ought to be read with Art 51A of Part IVA, fundamental duties of one and all. that way the courts need to probe into the causes of the cause of death , besides cause of dehydration with fever, the hon court cannot keep silent when public seek some meaningful judicial investigation whatever the hospitals say or the IMA says that way 'welfare legislation' works as Part III and Part IV, Part IVA Art 51A need to be read in and justice rendered that only infuse public trust on judiciary or for that matter governments or hospitals or any IMAs, is my considered suggestion under very welfare legislation principles, one cannot work on any limitation doctrines' diktates. With No malice on any. tks n regds.
see in Adarsh building case for Karghil widows , the plot was not given to the widows of kharghil heros, that way the Maharashtra govt misused the plots meant for Kharghil widows, in fact the building must be demolished and or allotted relevant square ft of accommodation to the kharghil widows, but what happened is compassionate grounds were misused by politicians for their own benefits, the hon writ court should have fined exemplary fines on the political allottees and allowed the Adharsh building premises be allotted to the kharghil widows; that never happened, but issue was played back and forth that way hon court too failed in its obligations under welfare legislations,
Fact is welfare legislation cannot have any limitation prescription is the very fundamental right of the applicant under compassionate grounds is the doctrine; that way Art 51A of Part IVA clamps on any authority is sum and substance.
You need to be
logged in to post comment
You can also submit your article by sending to email@example.com
view more »
Our Network Sites
Join LAWyersclubindia.com and Share your Knowledge. Registered members get a chance to interact at Forum, Ask Query, Comment etc.