Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shree Satish Prabhakar Padhye, a person with hearing disability, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking enforcement of his rights under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. He was employed as a telephone operator with Respondent No.5, Dalco Engineering Private Ltd., for 23 years. Due to the noisy environment in the factory where he worked, he gradually lost his hearing and was diagnosed with bilateral sensory neural loss, with 85% deafness. He was terminated from service. The petitioner contended that the employer failed to provide a safe working environment and that his termination violated Section 47 of the Act, which mandates that no employee acquiring disability during service shall be dispensed with or reduced in rank, and that the employer shall provide alternative employment. The respondents argued that the Act does not apply to private companies and that the petitioner's disability was not attributable to the work environment. The court analyzed the provisions of the Act, including definitions of disability and the obligations of employers. It held that the Act applies to all establishments, including private companies, and that the employer must ensure a safe working environment. The court found that the petitioner's disability was acquired during service due to the employer's negligence. Consequently, the court directed Respondent No.5 to re-employ the petitioner in a suitable post or, if not possible, to pay compensation equivalent to the salary he would have earned until the age of superannuation. The petition was allowed with these directions.
Headnote
A) Disability Law - Employment of Disabled Persons - Sections 47, 2(i), 2(t) Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 - The petitioner, a telephone operator, acquired hearing disability due to noisy work environment in respondent's factory. The court held that the Act applies to private establishments and that the employer must provide alternative employment or pay compensation if unable to do so. The court directed the employer to re-employ the petitioner in a suitable post or pay compensation equivalent to salary for the remaining service period. (Paras 1-10) B) Disability Law - Definition of Disability - Section 2(i) Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 - The petitioner's hearing loss of 85% was held to be a disability within the meaning of the Act. The court relied on medical certificates and audiogram to establish the disability. (Paras 2-3) C) Disability Law - Employer's Obligation - Section 47 Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 - The court held that the employer is obligated to re-employ an employee who acquires disability during service, and failure to do so amounts to violation of the Act. The court directed the employer to offer alternative employment or pay compensation. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a person who acquires disability during service is entitled to protection under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, and whether the employer is liable to re-employ or compensate such employee.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition and directed Respondent No.5 to re-employ the petitioner in a suitable post or pay compensation equivalent to salary for the remaining service period.
Law Points
- Employer's duty to provide safe working environment
- Disability acquired during service
- Re-employment of disabled employee
- Compensation for loss of employment
- Applicability of Persons with Disabilities Act to private companies
