KULDEEP SINGH Vs. DELHI TRASPORT CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short controversy emerges in this writ petition as to whether in view of the payment made by the respondent on account of compensation to the petitioner who was rendered medically unfit and was retired prematurely on medical ground, the petitioner is not entitled to reinstatement under Section 47 of The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter called "the Act'). Learned counsel for the respondent has contended that the petitioner was paid a sum of Rs.33,125/- as compensation under the scheme and a sum of Rs.70,941.60 was paid as compensation under workmen's Compensation Act in lieu of alternative employment. It was contended before me that respondents have formulated the scheme in view of directive given by Supreme Court in Anand Bihari and Ors. Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and Anr, AIR 1991 SC 1003. The scheme was formulated by the respondent and the amount of compensation was paid. Mr.Vibhu Shankar has further contended that the respondent was not obliged to reinstate the petitioner. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the amount of Rs.33,125/- was paid towards medical charges. She has further contended that this amount as well as compensation under the workmen's Compensation Act was paid prior to coming into force of Section 47 of the Act and there is no escape for the respondent but to employ the petitioner in view of Judgment of Supreme Court in Kunwar Pal Singh Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors. Civil Appeal No.1864/2000 arising out of SLP (C) 7997/99 where Supreme Court held as follows : "Special Leave Granted. Learned counsel for the appellant has brought to our attention Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities etc.) Act, 1995. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that it is the duty of respondent No.1 to employ the appellant in a Class IV post. If no such post exists, then by virtue of Section 47 of the said Act, a supernumerary post shall be created within eight weeks from today and employment given to the appellant with such reliefs as the appellant may be entitled to. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- B.M.Kirpal, J Sd/- Syed Shah Mohammad Quadri, J"

(2.) In view of the decision of the Supreme Court it is no more open for the respondent to contend that as the workman has been paid compensation under the scheme and compensation under the workmen's Compensation Act, the petitioner is not entitled to reinstatement in view of the specific provision of Section 47 of the Act. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the sum of Rs.33,125/- was paid towards medical expenses and not towards the scheme. Even if the said amount was paid under the scheme, the petitioner would have been entitled for reinstatement in view of the specific orders and directions passed by the Supreme Court in a similar case. There is no denial of the fact that the injury sustained by the petitioner was during the course of employment. That being so, the ratio of Kunwar Pal Singh's case (supra) squarely applies to the facts of the present case.

(3.) I, therefore, direct respondent to reinstate the petitioner in class IV post with protection of pay as contemplated under Section 47 of the Act. If there is no post available, the respondent would create a supernumerary post within eight weeks to accommodate the petitioner.