Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.26 seconds)The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection Of Rights And Full Participation) Act, 1995
Gujarat State Road Trans. Corp. vs Gopal Motambhaia Patel on 10 April, 2003
3.5. The Delhi High Court has relied on its earlier decision and it has spelt out that intention of Section 47 is to give adequate protection to disabled employee and to see that he is not rendered jobless and not deprived of his livelihood. Mr. Supehia has also placed reliance on the decision of this Court (Coram : H.K. Rathod, J.) in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation v. Gopal M. Patel reported in 2003 (2) G.L.R. 428, wherein the award passed by the Labour Court quashing and setting aside the order of termination of service of the concerned employee on the ground of disability, was confirmed by this Court.
Kunal Singh vs Union Of India & Anr on 13 February, 2003
Obviously, therefore, the petitioner was entitled to have full protection under Section 47. When that was the say, the respondents were under the statutory obligation to find out alternative suitable post for him having equal payscale. The affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent and the other material on the record of the petition, show that they have tried to find out suitable alternative post for him including the post in the Medical College but since, he was not acquainted with the Braille i.e. language for the blind, it was not possible to give him a job in the teaching institutions also. Mr. Supehia has drawn my attention to the decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Kunal Singh v. Union of India reported in 2003 A.I.R. S.C.W. p.1013. In the said decision it has been held as under :-
Section 2 in The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection Of Rights And Full Participation) Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Delhi Transport Corporation vs Rajbir Singh on 19 September, 2002
3.4. The Apex Court has gone to the extent of directing the concerned authorities to create a supernumerary post for the appellant, if no suitable post was found for him. Mr. Supehia has also placed reliance on the decision of the Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Delhi Transport Corporation v. Rajbir Singh reported in 100 (2002) Delhi Law Times 111 (DB). In the said judgment also it has been held that by virtue of Section 47 of the Act, a legal right has been conferred upon disabled employees to pray for and obtain a writ of mandamus.
1