Bombay High Court Quashes Termination of Disabled Driver Under Section 47 of Disabilities Act, 1995 — Employer Failed to Provide Alternate Employment Before Removing Employee from Muster. Driver Acquired Disability During Service Due to Spondylosis; Termination Held Illegal as Employer Did Not Offer Alternate Post as Required by Section 47 of Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 and MSRTC Notification.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 76
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Shaikh Salim Shaikh Amir, was appointed as a Driver in the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC) on 09-04-1980. He served for about 30 years until he developed a serious Spondylosis problem due to continuous driving on bad rural roads, causing severe back pain. On 08-03-2010, he applied for alternate work such as peon, security guard, or cleaner. The respondent asked him to undergo a medical examination by Dr. Shahapurkar on 19-03-2010, who reported that the petitioner had a gap in his spinal cord and should not be given driving work. Instead of providing alternate employment, the respondent No. 3 (Divisional Controller, Osmanabad) passed an order on 05-06-2010 terminating the petitioner's services and removing his name from the muster with effect from 18-05-2010. The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the termination order, declare it illegal and in violation of Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (Disabilities Act) and the MSRTC notification dated 12-04-2006, and to direct the respondents to give all consequential benefits including pensionary benefits as if he continued in service till superannuation. The court held that the termination was illegal and contrary to Section 47 of the Disabilities Act, which mandates that once an employee acquires a disability during service, the employer shall not dispense with or reduce in rank, but shall provide alternate employment in the same or higher post. The court also noted that the MSRTC notification dated 12-04-2006 required absorption in a suitable alternative post. The court allowed the petition, quashed the termination order, and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner for an alternate post and grant all benefits including pensionary benefits as if he continued in service till superannuation.

Headnote

A) Disability Law - Alternate Employment - Section 47 Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 - Employer's Duty - Petitioner, a driver with 30 years service, developed Spondylosis and was found unfit for driving - He requested alternate work like peon or security guard - Instead of providing alternate employment, respondent terminated his services and removed his name from muster - Held that termination violates Section 47 which mandates that once an employee acquires disability during service, the employer shall not dispense with or reduce in rank, but shall provide alternate employment in the same or higher post (Paras 2-5).

B) Service Law - Termination - Violation of Statutory Protection - Petitioner was appointed as driver in 1980, served for 30 years, developed back problem due to continuous driving on bad roads - Medical report confirmed gap in spinal cord, unfit for driving - Petitioner applied for alternate work on 08-03-2010 - Respondent terminated him on 05-06-2010 without offering any alternative post - Held that termination is illegal and contrary to Section 47 of Disabilities Act and MSRTC notification dated 12-04-2006 (Paras 3-5).

C) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Writ Jurisdiction - Quashing of Termination Order - Petitioner sought quashing of termination order dated 05-06-2010 and direction to give all consequential benefits - Court allowed petition, quashed termination order, directed respondents to consider petitioner for alternate post and grant all benefits including pensionary benefits as if he continued in service till superannuation (Paras 2, 5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether termination of a driver who acquired disability during service is valid under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and the MSRTC notification dated 12-04-2006

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition, quashed and set aside the order dated 05-06-2010 passed by respondent No. 3 terminating the petitioner's services and removing his name from muster. The court directed respondents No. 2 and 3 to consider the petitioner for an alternate post and grant all consequential benefits including pensionary benefits as if he continued in service till the date of his retirement on superannuation.

Law Points

  • Section 47 of Persons with Disabilities Act
  • 1995 mandates alternate employment for employees acquiring disability during service
  • employer cannot terminate without providing alternate post
  • notification dated 12-04-2006 of MSRTC requires absorption in suitable alternative post
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (BOM) (10) 13

WRIT PETITION NO. 6939 OF 2017

2019-10-01

SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, S.M.GAVHANE

Mr. Anandsingh S. Bayas for petitioner, Mr. G.O. Wattamwar AGP for respondent No.1, Mr. D.S. Bagul for respondent No.3

Shaikh Salim Shaikh Amir

The State of Maharashtra, The Managing Director M.S.R.T.C. Mumbai, The Divisional Controller Osmanabad Division Osmanabad

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging termination order and seeking reinstatement with consequential benefits

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of termination order dated 05-06-2010, declaration that it is illegal and in violation of Section 47 of Disabilities Act, 1995 and MSRTC notification dated 12-04-2006, and direction to respondents to give all consequential financial, monetary, pensionary and other admissible benefits by considering continuous service till retirement on superannuation

Filing Reason

Petitioner's services were terminated without providing alternate employment despite his request for alternate work due to disability acquired during service

Issues

Whether the termination of the petitioner's services is valid under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995? Whether the respondents were required to provide alternate employment to the petitioner before terminating his services?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that he served as driver for 30 years, developed Spondylosis due to continuous driving, requested alternate work, but was terminated without providing any alternate employment, violating Section 47 of Disabilities Act and MSRTC notification. Respondents argued that the petitioner was unfit for driving and therefore his services were terminated.

Ratio Decidendi

Under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, if an employee acquires a disability during service, the employer shall not dispense with or reduce in rank such employee, and shall provide alternate employment in the same or higher post. Termination without offering alternate employment is illegal and contrary to the Act and the MSRTC notification dated 12-04-2006.

Judgment Excerpts

By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside order dated 05-06-2010 passed by respondent No. 3-Divisional Controller Osmanabad division terminating the services of the petitioner and removing his name from muster from 18-05-2010, to declare that said order is illegal, incorrect and in violation of section 47 of The Person with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 Case of the petitioner is that he was appointed on 09-04-1980 on the post of Driver in the department of respondent No. 3 and till the impugned order on 05-06-2010 he has performed his duty properly and was awarded with the service excellence.

Procedural History

Petitioner filed writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India in 2017 challenging termination order dated 05-06-2010. Rule was issued and made returnable forthwith, heard finally with consent of parties. Judgment delivered on 01-10-2019.

Acts & Sections

  • The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995: Section 47
  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Petition Challenging Setting Aside of Disqualification of Gram Panchayat Members for Non-Payment of Taxes. The Additional Commissioner erred in excluding the period for payment specified in the tax bill from the three-month l...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Termination of Disabled Driver Under Section 47 of Disabilities Act, 1995 — Employer Failed to Provide Alternate Employment Before Removing Employee from Muster. Driver Acquired Disability During Service Due to Spondylosis...