Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking (BEST), filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the disability certificate issued by the Medical Board in favor of the respondent, Sadashiv Dnyandeo Gaikwad, an employee of BEST. The respondent had claimed disability benefits under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The Medical Board, constituted under the Act, assessed the respondent's disability and issued a certificate. The petitioner contended that the certificate was issued without proper examination and that the respondent's disability was not as severe as claimed. The Court examined the provisions of the Act, particularly Section 2(t) defining disability, and the role of the Medical Board. The Court held that the Medical Board is a statutory authority and its assessment of disability is a question of fact. The employer cannot challenge the certificate without independent medical evidence or proof of fraud or procedural irregularity. The Court further held that the writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 is not maintainable as the employer has an alternative remedy under the Act. The petition was dismissed, and the disability certificate was upheld.
Headnote
A) Disability Law - Challenge to Disability Certificate - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Employer cannot challenge disability certificate issued by Medical Board under Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 - The Court held that the employer's challenge to a disability certificate is not maintainable unless there is evidence of fraud or procedural irregularity, as the Medical Board is a statutory authority and its assessment is a question of fact (Paras 1-10). B) Disability Law - Definition of Disability - Section 2(t) of Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 - The Court interpreted the definition of disability and held that the Medical Board's determination of disability percentage is binding on the employer (Paras 11-20). C) Constitutional Law - Articles 226 and 227 - Scope of Judicial Review - The Court held that a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 is not maintainable to challenge a disability certificate issued by a Medical Board, as the employer has an alternative remedy under the Act (Paras 21-30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the employer can challenge the disability certificate issued by a duly constituted Medical Board under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, and whether the writ petition is maintainable against such certificate.
Final Decision
The Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the employer cannot challenge the disability certificate without independent medical evidence or proof of fraud or procedural irregularity, and that the writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 is not maintainable as the employer has an alternative remedy under the Act.
Law Points
- Disability certificate issued by Medical Board is final and binding on employer
- Employer cannot challenge disability certificate without independent medical evidence
- Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India not maintainable against disability certificate
- Persons with Disabilities Act
- 1995 Section 2(t) definition of disability
- Medical Board's assessment of disability percentage is a question of fact
