Concessions Granted only when Disability is over Forty Percent

Union of India and Others vs. KP Singh

Filed under:Articles 16 and 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 Section 2 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995
Appellant:Union of India and Others
Respondent:KP Singh
Citation:2002 VIII AD (Delhi) 515
Court:In the High Court of Delhi
Judges: SB Sinha and AK Sikri

Facts

KP Singh was a handicapped person who qualified his B.E. (Civil) from Birla Institute of Technology. Thereafter in 1997 he qualified the All India Competitive Examination for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) in the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) on receiving the benefit of age relaxation.

He relied upon a certificate issued by Bara Hindu Rao Hospital, Delhi wherein it was expressed that he was a disabled person. He was then referred to Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, Delhi. RML certified him to be handicapped to the extent of 9%. Because of this, his result was cancelled. He then filed an application in the Tribunal against the order.

The main contention of the UOI was that as per the terms of the policy, the minimum degree of disability for any benefit/concession for the physically handicapped was required to be 40%. The medical certificate submitted by KP Singh stated that his disability was only to the extent of 10% and when he was referred to the Ram Manohar Hospital, this disability level came down to 9% and because of this reason his examination result was cancelled.

The Tribunal held that in view of the certificate issued by the Hindu Rao Hospital, there was no doubt that KP Singh suffered from a physical handicap which entitled him to benefit of age relaxation. Accordingly, the Tribunal directed the UOI and others to consider his case for appointment as regular Junior Engineer by giving him the benefit for physically handicapped persons.

The Tribunal further directed that KP Singh would not be accorded the back wages but he would be given the benefit of seniority and national pay – fixation. These directions were to be carried out within a period of two months.

The UOI and others filed this writ petition challenging the order passed by the Tribunal.

Observations of the Court

The Court examined the relevant sections of the Persons with Disabilities Act along with the relevant clauses of the Office Memorandum of Central Public Works Department dated 04.06.1998. On the basis of these, the Court held that KP Singh did not fulfill the criteria and therefore the Tribunal was wrong in passing the judgment.

According to the Court, if the certificate granted by the Bara Hindu Rao Hospital was to be treated as final, then KP Singh could not be considered for appointment as per the terms of the policy. The Court held that the Tribunal had committed a grave error in issuing the directions. According to the Court, the requirement of a policy decision must be strictly adhered to.

The judgment given by the Tribunal was set aside and it was declared that since KP Singh had not fulfilled the criteria, he could not be considered for recruitment under the reserved category candidate. The Writ Petition was accordingly allowed.

Sections Referred:

  • Article 16 and 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950
  • Section 2 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995