Sanjay Kumar v. The Union Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2955 of 2014 ======================================================
1. Sanjay Kumar Son Of Sri Hira Lal Resident Of Jairam Bazar, Pethia, P.O.- Khagaul, District- Patna (Bihar) Ex-Assistant Station Master, North West Railway, Jodhpur .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Railway, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. The General Manager, North West Railway, Jaipur
3. The Divisional Railway Manager, North West Railway, Jodhpur
4. The Chief Medical Director, North West Railway, Jaipur
5. The Chief Medical Superintendent, North West Railway, Jodhpur
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, North West Railway, Jodhpur
7. The Senior Divisional Operating Manager, North West Railway, Jodhpur
8. The Medical Director, R.P. Centre, All India Institute Of Medical Science, New Delhi
9. Dr. N.S. Nainwal, Divisional Medical Officer (Ortho) Nort West Railway, Bikaner .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocate Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, Advocate Mr. Jitendra Narayan, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA) 03-11-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for Union of India.
2. Petitioner by filing this writ petition assailed order dated 23.05.2013 passed by Patna Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal wherein learned Tribunal has refused to interfere with the order dated 2/3.04.2009 passed by the Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner removing him from
service on medical grounds.
3. It appears from the report of Deputy CMD/T&A dated 18.02.2009, Annexure-1 series that petitioner was declared mailingering for colour vision and unfit for service under para 512(2) sub note (ii) of I.R.M.M. 2000. In the light of the finding of the Medical Authorities, the Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner under order dated 02.04.2009, also contained in Annexure-1 series directed to compulsory retire him on medical grounds. In the light of order of the Disciplinary Authority, the Controlling Authority of the petitioner actually removed him from service on 2/3.04.2009, Annexure-1 series.
4. Petitioner assailed the aforesaid action of the Disciplinary Authority before the Patna Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal on the ground that his removal from service on medical ground that he has developed colour blindness is wholly arbitrary and ignoramus of the provision contained in The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995 wherein the Authorities are enjoined with a duty to identify the post(s) in their establishment over which the disabled be provided employment. In the instant case, petitioner when appointed in service was absolutely fit. Later, he developed colour blindness which could
not have been reason to compulsory retire him as Respondent Authorities could have adjusted him on some other post available in the office from before. The Tribunal has failed to consider the aforesaid aspect of the matter as also provisions of the Act.
5. In the circumstances, we have no option but to set aside not only the order impugned passed by the Tribunal but also the order of the Disciplinary Authority dated 2/3.04.2009, Annexure-1 Series with a direction to the Authorities to reinstate the petitioner on a post which is suitable for him a colour blind person. Before parting with this order, we may observe that reinstatement of the petitioner is with continuity in service but he shall not be allowed salary for the period during which he was not allowed work because of the orders impugned.
6. Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above but without cost.
(V.N. Sinha, J) (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) perwez U T