Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.03.25 18:25:25 +0530 2025:CGHC:14124 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1009 of 2022 1 - Jitendra Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Panu Ram Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Ward No. 03, Santoshi Nagar, Behind Tehsil Office, Gariyaband District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh. versus Petitioner(s) 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Chief Secretary, Department Of Forest And Climate Change, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Additional Principal Chief Conservator Of Forests (Administration Non Gazetted), Aranya Bhawan, Sector - 19, North Block, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Conservator Of Forest Raipur Circle, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Deputy Director Udanti Sitanadi Tiger Reserve, District Gariyaband District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Forest Range Officer Uttar Udanti Range, Mainpur, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) For State
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Aniket Verma Advocate : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Dy. GA (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 24/03/2025 1. Challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the order dated 18/02/2022 2 by which the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce the requisite medical certificate within a period of 15 days from the date of joining of service on 27/09/2019, pursuant to the order dated 25/09/2019. The petitioner is also seeking a direction towards the respondents’ authorities to give a posting under the provisions of the Right of Person with Disabilities Act, 2016. 2. (a) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Petitioner in pursuant to notification/advertisement dated 29/08/2018 for the post of Forest Guard issued by the Office of Deputy Director, Udanti Sitandi Tiger Reserve, Gatiyaband (C.G.), participated in the selection process and got selected for the post of Forest Guard after completing the physical measure and physical fitness test conducted on 12/09/2018. Subsequently, appointment order was issued to the petitioner on 25/09/2019 (Annexure-P/3) and he appeared before respondent Nos. 4 & 5 and gave his joining on 27/09/2019 (Annexure-P/4). According to the petitioner, he was asked to submit the medial fitness certificate. (b) Since the petitioner had not brought his personal belonging from District Mahasamund, he applied for a leave of 5 days on 27/09/2019 (Annexure-P/5), which was granted to him by the respondents’ authorities and while going back to his house for the said purpose, the petitioner met with an accident and he informed the same along with medical prescription regarding the accident, which was received by respondent No.5 on 10/10/2019 (Annexure-P/6). Thereafter, the petitioner appeared before the Authorities and also submitted requisite 3 medical certificate of his fitness after the treatment for accident, wherein the doctor certified that the petitioner was treated from 17/03/2020 to 20/03/2020 and advised for medical leave from 21/03/2020 to 20/04/2020. Thereafter, the petitioner requested the authorities to post him at a suitable place looking to his health condition and the disability occurred on account of accident. Based on the same, vide letter dated 26/12/2020, Deputy Director directed the petitioner to submit the requisite certificate from the Medical Board to enable them to take appropriate steps. Pursuant to the said directions, the petitioner submitted the Disability certificate dated 15/01/2021 issued by the District Medical Board, Gariyaband, wherein they assessed the disability of the petitioner at 45%, copy of the same has been produced by the petitioner before the Deputy Director by letter dated 25/01/2021. Thereafter, the petitioner is running from pillar to post for redressal of his grievance but the same does not fructify, and only correspondences took place from one office to another. The respondents’ authorities, subsequently, without appreciating the disabilities faced by the petitioner, all of a sudden, by order dated 18/02/2022 cancelled the appointment order of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce the requisite medical documents, as per the condition of the appointment order, within the stipulated period. The said order is illegal, arbitrary and not at all sustainable in the eyes of law. (c) Referring to Section 20 of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 20161, he would submit that no Govt. establishment shall 1 The Act, 2016 4 discriminate against any person with disability in any matter relating to employment, as such, the respondent authorities must have taken a decision as to what post the petitioner must be given after his disability and if no suitable post is present then a supernumerary post should be given as per the section 20 of the Act, 2016. 3. Per Contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that as per the condition No.2 of the appointment order, the petitioner was required to produce medical certificate from the District Medial Board and subject to producing the Certificate, the appointment order of the petitioner was valid. Since, he has failed to do so, therefore, vide order impugned 18/02/2022, the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled. He further submits that the petitioner had been selected for the post of Forest Guard. As per medical certificate produced by the petitioner, there has been 45 % disability pointed out on account of accident met with by him. Since the said post has not been reserved for disabled person, therefore, the petitioner contention to validate his appointment cannot be accepted, as such, there is no illegality and infirmity in the order impugned. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings
Decision
and documents annexed with the writ petition. 5. It is an admitted fact that pursuant to the selection process initiated by the respondents’ authorities, the petitioner participated in the said process and got selected for the post of Forest guard. Subsequently, the 5 appointment order was issued on 25/09/2019. On receipt of the said appointment order, the petitioner gave his joining on 27/09/2019 before the respondents’ authorities and thereafter, he submitted an application for grant of 5 days casual leaves from 28/09/2019 to 02/10/2019 vide Annexure-P/5, from which, it is apparent that the same was duly received by the office of the Forest Range Officer. In the meantime, he met with an accident as a result of which, he sustained injuries on various part of the body. The said fact has duly been considered by the District Medical Board, Gariyaband and found that “At present palsy still remain Lt. Upper limb and unable to perform his normal routine work from left hand”. It also opined that the petitioner sustained the disability of 45%. 6. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 has been enacted to give effect to provide equality of opportunity and to give respect for difference and acceptance of persons with disabilities as part of human diversity and humanity. Section 20 of the Act, 2016 provides thus:- “20. Non-discrimination in employment.-(1) No Government establishment shall discriminate against any person with disability in any matter relating to employment: Provided that the appropriate Government may, having regard to the type of work carried on in any establishment, by notification and subject to conditions, if any, exempt any establishment from the provisions of this section. (2) Every Government establishment shall provide reasonable accommodation and appropriate barrier free and conducive environment to employees with disability. (3) No promotion shall be denied to a person merely on the 6 ground of disability. (4) No Government establishment shall dispense with or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during his or her service: Provided that, if an employee after acquiring disability is not suitable for the post he was holding, shall be shifted to some other post with the same pay scale and service benefits: Provided further that if it is not possible to adjust the employee against any post, he may be kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable post is available or he attains the age of superannuation, whichever is earlier. (5) The appropriate Government may frame policies for posting and transfer of employees with disabilities. 7. It is not the case of the respondent that after joining of the service, the petitioner left the posting place without intimating the authorities. In fact, immediately after joining, he moved an application for grant of leave on the ground that he has to bring his baggage and luggage from his home town, and the said application has been duly accepted by the authorities and they never raised any dispute that the petitioner remained absent from duties unauthorizedly. When the petitioner met with an accident, he immediately informed the said fact to the authorities along with the medical prescription and the disability Certificate issued by the District Medical Board, which is a competent authority. Since, the petitioner was under the treatment on account of the accident, he could not obtain the requisite Medical Fitness Certificate as per clause 2 of the appointment order within the stipulated period. Thus, the Authorities cannot cancel the appointment of the petitioner merely on the ground 7 that he could not fulfill the conditions of the appointment orders in its true perspective. They ought to have considered the fact regarding the accident met with by the petitioner. 8. In view of the foregoing, the impugned order dated 18/02/2022 is quashed. The respondent Authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner and take appropriate steps for providing the necessary employment to the petitioner as per the Act, 2016 and in accordance with the extant Rules and after obtaining the latest disability certificate of the petitioner from the Competent Medical Board as the earlier certificate issued on 15/01/2021 was for three years. 9. The Writ Petition is allowed to the above extent. Rahul Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE