High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ' order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF NIANDAN'IUS declaring the proceedings No E2l693 (02)/ 2015-WL-1, Dt-22-o5-2015 of the 3'd respondent retiring the petitioner without paying the salary from 12-01-2012 Io 22-05-2015 and fixing the pay of the driver is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the A P S R T C Service Regulations' the provisions of Act, 1 of 1996 the persons with Disabilities (Equar, opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Partition )Act' 1995 and as well violation of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under the constitution of lndia and set aside the same to the extent of denying the wages and other service benefits and consequently direct the respondents to pay salary ftom 12-01-2012 Io 22-05-2015 and fix the pay in the cadre of Driver' with all attendants service benefits and arrears thereof to the petitioner' I.A. NO: 10F20171WPM P. NO : 14340F 20171 Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents to pay the sarary from 12-01-2012 to 22-05-2015 and fix the pay in the cadre of Driver and arrears thereof to the petitioner forthwith, pending disposal of the ma jn Writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI A. JAGAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRt N. SREEDHAR REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER =- I { I I I I i j ' I , I , I r , I , I i i I I t l a HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITI oN No. ].292 0 20L7 F OR D ER: Petitioner is stated to have been appoinled as driver in the respondent - State Road Transport Corporarion in 1995' While so, he was declared unfit for the said post during medical examination at Regional Hospital uid'e medtcal certificate dated o2.o|.2ol2andatNIMSthroughmedicalcertificatedated 28 Ol-2015. When hc was referred to APSRTC Medical Board at Tarnaka, Hyderabad' docLors thereat also held that he rt'as unflt to the post of the driver through medrcal certificate dated 05-06-2012. Petitioner therefore' requesled respondents to provide alternative employment but the latter kept him out of employment for the last three years and they dicl not pay him salary from l2-Ol 2Ol2 to 22-O5-2Ol5 Thereafter' respondents retired petltioner through proceedings d'aLed 22-05-20 l5 which is impugned in this Writ Petition Petitioner contcnds that the arbitrary and contrary to the said Proceedings Service Regulations as well as provlslons of the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (trqua1' Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Partition) Act' i995 (for short, 'the Act') and violation of Fundamental Rights He aiso contends is illegai, under the Constitution of India APSRTC ..-guaranteeci ) .T!| \, . -- jEf{ \,. .-,sa that Sectjon 4Z of tine said Act says that no establishment shall dispense r,r,ith or reduce in rank an employee who acquires a disability during his service. proviso makes it clear that if an emplovee, after acquiring clisability is not suitable for the post he was holclir-rg, could be shifted to some other post with the same pay scale and serwice benefits. provided further that if it is not possible to adiust the employee against any post, he may be kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable post is availabre or he attains the age of superannuation, whichever rs earlier. In similar circumstances, this Court allowed Writ petition No. 22269 of 2Ot2 by 25-09-2O72 directing the salary to petitioner for break period of service. Challenging the same, the Corporation filed Writ Appeal No. 739 of 20 13 ancl the same was dismissed following the judgments of thc Hon,bic Apex Court rn Kunal Singh u. Uniom of Indiat and that ol this Court in K. Moses v. AI|SRTC, Musheerabad, Hgderabadz holding that respondent is under obligation to provide alternative employment u,ith all benefits. Following the same, this Court allo*,ed Writ petition No. 7633 of 2013 and batch by ordcr dated 29_0I-2016 and Writ pctition No. 304 12 of 2O13 by order dated 03_02_2014 clirecLing Corporation to pay order dated ' 2ooa1+1 scc 52.+ '20 (r) AI.D lSlj i I I I I I I i i I I t I I t I I I I t./tt I { t I r t I I I : l Ii ; -) respondent to frx pay in the cadre of driver and to pay all the attendant benefrts To the same effect is the order in Writ Petition No '22269 of 2Ol2 d'ated 25'09'2012 Aggrieved by the same, the Corporation frled Writ Appeal No 739 of 2013 which was dismissed by order dated 25 06 '2O 13' Challenging the same respondent Corporation trled SLP No (Civii) 1438 of 2014 before the Hon'ble Apex Court which dismissed the same by order dated, 07.o2-2O14 The action of the Respondent in not fixing thc pay in thc cadre of driver and paying the salary irom 12-01- 2al2 Lo 22-05-2015 is illegai' arbitrary and unfair labour practice and the same is in contravention of Act I I \996 and violation of fundamentai rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India' In the counter, the CorPoration laid thcir case 2 initiallY aPPointed as dailY wage stating lhat Petrtloner was driver and his services were regularized as Drirrer from or.os.lgooatMahabubabadDepot'Whenhewassubjectedto periodical medical examination' the Medical Ofhcer' Warangal deciared him unfit to the post of Driver in A1 Category due to 'Colour Blindness' uide MC No' 147277 ' dated' O2'O1 2OI2' At his request, petitioner was examined at RTC Hospital' Tarnaka and was declared unht for the said post due to 'Defective distant { T I I t i t : t i i I I I i I i 1 I \-t!F!il \,.,'';.' tfa \.', . , j:i,,,ii 4 Vision,due to REFRACTIVE trRROR,. Thereafter, on Application dated 19.O6.2012, petitioner u.as referred to Medical Board for consideration of fitness. On 1O.O1.2013, he u.as phl,sically_ examined and as per the doctors, opinion, he *as directed to report at AM (T)/WL-I but he did not report to the duty and again he requested to direct him for medical examination. Accordingly, he was directeci to MO/RTC Dispensary, Warangal where he vgas declarcd un fit to the post of. Driver in A 1 Category uide MC No. 148573 dated. I 1.O2.2OI3. Again on the Application clared 79 .02.20 13, he was examined by Medical Officer (PHy) on 16 O2_2Oi5 ancl u.as lound nnfit for Driver in ,A1 Category due ro "DEMENTA WITH MEMORY IMPAIRED,. Petitioner therefore, submittecl representation dated 19.03.2015 requesting to provicle alternative post or retire him from serwice on medical qrounds and pay additional monetary bcnefit fund (AMBF) Petitioner accordingly, u,as directed to Chief Medical Officer, Hospital, Taranaka, Hyderabad on 24.O3.2O15. The uide LeLter dated 0g.04.2015 inlbrmed that Medical Board would meet on 29.O4_2OlS to consider his review petttion Personnel Officcr Petitioner was examined by Medical Officer (pHy) who opined lhat he is UNF IT or the post of Driver in A I t i I t ) and also for ali other categories as per the Medical Category to'DEMENTIA/METABoLIC standards of APSRTC' due MEMORY IMPAIRMENT and he is eligible for additional bene{it.Ontherepresentationofpetitioner'dated 21.05.2015 , he was retired tiom service on medical grounds from 22.O5.2O15 and he received all consequential monetary with effect :,1 I A'l bene{its without any Protest'

3. Heard Sn A Jagan' learned counsel for petitioner asweilasSriN.SreedharReddy,learnedStandingCounselfor RTC and Peruse<l the record' From the material on record' it is evident that 4. petitioner was declared unltt for the post of Driver by the duly constituted Medical Boarcl of the Corporation and as per the MedicalstandardsoftheCorporation.TheMedicalBoardofthe Respondent Corporation is the Authority to decide the medical htncss of an employee and the opinion shall be final Petitioner was examined by Medical Offrcer (PHY) who opined that he is UNFITortheposto[DrivcrinAlCategoryandalsoUNFITfor all other categories as per the Medical standards of APSRTC' due to "DEMENTIA/METABOLIC MEMORY IMPAIRMENT and he is eligibie for'additional monetary beneht' Accordingly' on the representation of petitioner dated 21'05'2O15' he was 6 retired from service on medical Grounds with effect from 22.O5.2O15 and all consequential benefits including the salary for the periocl from 12_Ot .2072 to 22.OS.2Ollduly adjusting the leaves as per his credit in his leave account, were paid to him. 5. It is brought to the notice of this Court bv the learned Standing Counsel that recently, a batch of cases relating to iilternative employment for employees under the Act was allou.ed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 36337 of 2O)2 and barch dated 20.O1.2O16. Aggrieved by the said order, the Corporation filed Writ Appeal No. 112O of 2O1S and batch wherein by order dated the order of learned Sirrgie Judge was confirmed Challenging the said order, the Corporation hled SLp u.hich was allowed b1r the Hon,ble Supreme Court uid.e orcler dated 23.O2.2O17 holding that ontv disabilities enumerated under the Act are covered by the provisions of the Act. Though learned counsel tbr petitioner relied on the judgments, referred to supra, they are, as nghtly contended by the learned Standing Counsel. prlor to the judgment rcndered by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3428 ol 207T and batch d,ated 23.O2.2Ot2. Inview of the same, this Court is of the opinion that petitioner is entitled for protection under [he persons with Disabilities (Equal

08.09.2016. \ i i I I a , , ..: 7 $ !l opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation)' Act' 1995, in particular Section 47 is incorrect' Further' it is also to be considered that petitioner retired on 22 05 '2015 and the present writ petition is hled \n 2Ol7 In the light of the above' the Writ Petition does not merit any consideration and is table to be dismissed' 6 cos ts 7 The Writ Petition 1s accordinglY, dismissed No Consequently, Miscellaneous Appllcations' if any shall stand ciosed nssrsrDl'l[ont%'L'+[lk //TRUE COPY// secrh$Srrrcen 3ffi 333 3j'$ dt%li"i$:"'"'X':l?:ig" toPucl Two CD CoPies To I 2 J TJ TKS , I I i HIGH COURT DATED:28 tO5t2O2s ORDER WP.No.1292 of ZOlt ) Blo k tlE S Ia tc o 2 o 13 mE 216 * DESrr4rCHf ( o .:\ DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ?,D