MAHINDER SINGH Vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O .A. Nos. 3255/2013, 3257/2013, 3430/2013, 3612/2013, 3613/2013 and 3621/2013 have been taken up together on the request of Counsel on the ground that the issues and reliefs claimed in these OAs are identical. Common arguments were made by the Counsel of both sides in the aforenoted cases. The respondents are also common. In view of above, we are disposing of all these OAs by this common order. Leading case adopted for considering the pleadings as well as the documents is O.A. No. 3255/2013. The applicants are aggrieved by oral order dated nil of June, 2013 by which the applicants have been laid off duty as Drivers on the ground that they were medically unfit for the post of Driver. According to the facts of the case, the applicants had applied for appointment with DTC through Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) and on being found successful, they were offered appointment as Drivers with DTC. In the year 2010, after selection to the post of Drivers and on being found medically fit by the Medical Board of DTC and upon re -medical examination by Guru Nanak Eye Center, NCTD, the applicants were appointed as Drivers with DTC and at that time, according to the medical certificate that was acted upon by the respondent, they had perfect vision at the time of appointment. Subsequently, in 2012 on completion of probation period, they were regularized in service. Some of applicants, however, were still on probation. They continued to work satisfactorily. In 2012 -13, they were subjected to another medical examination by the respondent and were informed that they were found medically unfit upon medical examination by the Medical Board. Copy of the report of Medical Board has been annexed as Annexure A -3. It is further stated that the applicants had got themselves examined from AIIMS, New Delhi and their vision was declared perfect. Subsequently in June, 2013, the respondent stopped assigning duty to the applicants who were found medically unfit upon medical examination. The applicants have contended that under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Right of Protection and Full Participation) Act, 1995 equal opportunities are granted to disabled persons. As per Section 47 of the said Act, if a person became unfit by way of disability for a particular post while in service, he would not be dispensed with or reduced in rank by the employer but would be shifted to some other post with the same pay scale and service benefits. It is also stated that vide Circular dated 20.3.2006, the respondent declared that henceforth the provisions of Section 47 of the said Act would be complied in all cases where an employee acquires disability during his service career, and/or being declared unfit by the DTC Medical Board. The applicants therefore contended that having found them medically fit in all respects and now after taking work from them for more than four years, the respondents action in laying them off duty is illegal being in violation of law and the respondents own circular. It is further stated that despite their request, the respondent did not assign them duty. According to the applicants, a similar matter i.e. TA 52/2012 is already pending in this Tribunal.

(2.) RELIEFS sought in this O.A. as given in paragraph 8 are as under:

(3.) THE respondents have further stated in the counter affidavit that the applicants along with other candidates were directed to appear before the DTC Medical Board for their medical examination. The Board, after examining the candidates in terms of the laid down Medical Standards for the post of Driver, declared many of the candidates medically unfit who were found defective due to vision deformities. Those who were found medically unfit, started representing by submitting fitness certificate obtained from Government Hospitals. The DTC Board, after considering the representations, took a decision vide Resolution dated 22.12.2009 to take up the matter with Guru Nanak Eye Hospital in respect of those candidates who were declared medically unfit by DTC Medical Board as per the laid down Medical Standards of the Corporation for medical fitness through a Medical Board of that hospital. The applicants were directed to appear before Guru Nanak Eye Centre for a second medical examination and such candidates who were found medically fit, were given appointment for the post of Driver. Subsequently, one of those drivers, who were initially found medically unfit by the DTC Medical Board and later on found fit by the Guru Nanak Eye Centre, caused an accident and was thereafter re -examined by the Medical Board. On his re -examination, the DTC Medical Board declared him unfit for the post of Driver and, therefore, his services were terminated by the DTC. The CMO suggested vide Note dated 23.5.2011 that such drivers who were declared medically fit by the Guru Nanak Eye Centre, and were working as drivers in DTC may be directed to get re -medical examination to avoid any accidents in future because of medical unfitness of the driver. The DTC, vide Resolution dated 12.4.2012, decided to get all such drivers, who were declared fit by Guru Nanak Eye Centre, to be medically re -examined by an Independent Medical Board for considering cases of defective vision. Accordingly, the concerned DTC drivers along with applicants were sent for their re -medical examination by an Independent Medical Board for eye -vision tests which gave its report declaring them medically unfit. Since they have been found unfit by a special Medical Board constituted by GNCT of Delhi, specially having regard to the fact that they were initially declared fit, they managed to enter the service on the basis of false medical certificates.