SATISH PRABHAKAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner is a person with hearing disability who has acquired his disability consequent upon and during his service with Respondent No. 5. The petitioner was a trained Telephone Operator working as such with Respondent No. 5 for 23 years. Respondent no. 5 are in the business of manufacturing industrial equipments and the Petitioner was posted in their factory. He was not provided with a soundproof cabin. The Petitioner contends that he worked under extremely noisy surroundings in the 5th Respondent's factory. It is his case that due to constant loud manufacturing sounds his sense of hearing became gradually impaired and he had to undergo medical treatment ultimately leading to the termination of his services by respondent No. 5. His legal rights to employment under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter, for the sake of brevity, referred to as "the Act") are under consideration in this matter.

(2.) THE Petitioner has relied upon the Certificate of his Physician dated 29th October 1994 showing that he suffers from bilateral sensory neural loss. He was advised not to get exposed to noisy surroundings. Thereafter, on 17th March, 1998 he has undergone an audiogram which illustrates the hearing loss in decibels as against the frequency in hertz in respect of both his ears. The Audiologist has shown how the petitioner's hearing has been impaired. The right ear shows profound sensory neural loss. The left ear shows severe sensory neural loss. A certificate given by another Physician dated 25th March, 1998 shows around 85% deafness. He was certified handicapped for his day-today activities due to his deafness.

(3.) A subsequent Audiogram dated 10th June, 2000 showed further impairment of his left ear. The audiologist's report showed no benefit from amplification. It was advised that the Petitioner should not be doing any job which requires use of only auditory modality. It was further advised that Visual auditory Modality may be a better option.