GULER CHAND Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the order dated 30th 1. November, 1999 whereby the services of the petitioner who was appointed as Safai Karamchari at a salary of Rs.100/- per month by the Parents Teachers Association of Government Senior Secondary School, Bhullana, District Kangra were terminated only on the ground that the Parents Teachers Association was in need of a person who could also perform the duties of watchman when the watchman on leave. After termination of the services of the petitioner, respondent No.4 was appointed as Safai Karamchari -cum- watchman. This petition was filed by the petitioner in March, 2000 before the erstwhile H.P.State Administrative 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. Tribunal at Dharamshala. For 9 years this petition could not be decided and on abolition of the Tribunal this petition has been transferred to this Court in terms of the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (Transfer of Decided and Pending Cases and application) Act, 2008 and registered as CWP (T) 7213 of 2008.

(2.) The petitioner has appeared before me in person alongwith his mother Garanthu Devi. It is apparent that the petitioner is disabled. He is not so disabled that he cannot perform his job properly. He is slightly mentally challenged also. A photocopy of the certificate with regard to his disability has been placed on record which shows that his disability is to the extent of 50%. It is indeed a rather sad state of affairs when this widowed mother and her disabled and mentally challenged son have to fight the might of the State to obtain pittance of Rs.100/- per month. Does the State being a welfare State not own any responsibility to its citizens? The answer obviously has to be that the State cannot ignore its responsibility. The appointment of the petitioner as part time Safai Karamchari by the PTA has been set-aside without issuing notice to him. The impugned order is illegal and has to be set-aside. Normally, such an order would have to be set-aside since the same has been passed in total violation of the rules of natural justice. However, if I pass such an order then the service of respondent No.4 who may be equally poor and who has been working on the said post for the last nine years will have to be set-aside. This will cause great hardship to him. As such, I feel that this is a case where relief should be moulded in such a manner that some benefit is given to the petitioner without disturbing the appointment of the private respondent.

(3.) In CWP No. 192 of 2004 Ankush Dass Sood vs. State of H.P. and others, this Court had noticed that though this country made its tryst with destiny almost 60 years back the rights of the disabled and especially those belonging to the economically weaker sections of society had been totally trampled by those in power. Persons suffering from disability are unable to live a complete life not only due to their own limitation but also by barriers created by the society. Such persons are not treated with the empathy that they need from the society. Paying lip sympathy is not enough. These people are virtually ostracized from the society. They cannot attend school because our school teachers are not trained to deal with the disabled. They cannot even utilize the transport facilities because neither our buildings nor our transportation is geared to meet the needs of the disabled. In Ankush Dass Sood's case referred to above on repeated notices being issued to the State it was found that despite the mandate of The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 virtually no post had been identified or filled in from amongst the disabled.