D.C. CHANDRASHEKARIAH Vs. DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, a workman employed under the respondent-State Transport Corporation (KSRTC, Chickmagalur), has called into question the order dated 13.08.2010 in Writ Petition No. 10744/2010 of learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the petition of the appellant was partly allowed, so as to modify the award of the Industrial Tribunal, partly holding in favour of the appellant. The interesting facts, in brief, of the case of the appellant are that he was employed as a Conductor under the respondent and after nearly 11 years' of service, he was compulsorily retired on 07.03.2001 on the ground of surgical amputation of his leg due to which, he had remained absent from 03.04.2000 to 30.09.2000. According to the respondent, the appellant was admitted to hospital due to pain in his left leg and he remained hospitalized from 18.04.2000 to 30.04.2000, when his leg was amputated due to gangrene developing in the leg. Thereafter, he was termed by the respondent to be unable to perform his duties and hence, the order to compulsorily retire him was made. The appellant raised an industrial dispute, which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal, Mysore as late as on 27.12.2005 and that dispute was resolved by the award dated 30.06.2008. Although the Industrial Tribunal, in terms, set aside the order dated 07.03.2001, it directed the respondent to ascertain whether the nature of disease for which the appellant had to undergo surgical treatment was due to the nature of his job or any problem aggravated by that job and then to consider his prayer. The respondent was also directed to consider the prayer of the appellant on humanitarian ground as well and after obtaining opinion from the medical officer concerned.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the award and order of the Industrial Tribunal, the appellant approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No. 10744/2010, which was disposed by the order impugned herein and learned Single Judge, taking note of the fact that the appellant was already reinstated in the post of Sweeper with effect from 06.07.2009, only directed the KSRTC to notionally fix his pay, so as to afford him current wages for the post of Sweeper and extend the benefit of continuity of service only for the purpose of terminal benefits. Being aggrieved by the limited relief granted to the appellant, he is before this Court in appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel Ms. Nafeesa Baig appearing for the appellant vehemently argued that under the express provisions of Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (for short 'the Act'), the respondent was prohibited from dispensing with the service of the appellant or reducing the rank of the appellant, on the basis that he had acquired a disability. She also argued that the respondent again violated the express provisions of Section 47 of the Act in reducing the rank of the appellant while re-employing him with effect from 06.07.2009 and hence, the appellant is entitled to the difference of salary and other allowances to which he would be entitled, if he had been continued in the same post and same scale of pay. It was fairly conceded that neither the Industrial Tribunal nor learned Single Judge was apprised of the provisions of Section 47 of the Act and therefore, the award or the impugned order does not contain even a passing reference to the relevant provisions of the Act.