Rights of Visually Impaired to be Protected in State Employment

National Federation of the Blind, U.P and Others vs. State of U.P and Others

Appellants/Petitioners: National Federation of the Blind, U.P and Others
Respondent: State of U.P and Others
Citation: Writ Petition No.6193 of 2003, Unreported, Decided on 10/11/2005
Court: In the High Court of Allahabad (Lucknow Bench)
Judges: Rakesh Sharma

This is a petition filed by the National Federation of the Blind and three others seeking an order directing the U.P Government to pay all visually impaired employees working as chair recaners salary in the same pay scale as the carpenters, painters etc.

Facts

The National Federation of the Blind, U.P (the Federation) is a registered society working with visually impaired persons. The Federation and others who filed this petition were seeking a direction to all the Government Departments in Uttar Pradesh to pay all the visually impaired employees working as Chair Recaners the salary in the same pay scale as was being allowed to carpenters, painters etc.

Their case was that they had made a representation before the State Government following which a meeting was held to discuss the matter under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, U.P. Government. In that meeting, it was agreed that the visually impaired Chair Recaners would be granted the technical pay scale and necessary approval from the Finance Department would be sought. A meeting was also held with the Secretaries, Finance and the Labour Departments jointly.

Arguments made on behalf of the National Federation of the Blind and others

It was argued on behalf of the Federation and other petitioners that despite a decision being taken in this regard, no action had been taken for granting a higher pay scale to 2-4 petitioners (names not mentioned) and other visually impaired chair recaners. There were about 200 recaners appointed throughout the State in various Government Departments who were being deprived of the benefit of a higher payscale. Further, it was argued that the matter had not been placed before the Pay Committee whereas painters, carpenters and drivers had been allowed higher pay scales.

It was argued that the petitioners had acquired an additional skill and training in recaning chairs and were therefore entitled for a higher payscale admissible to semi-skilled Group- D employees. The petitioners admitted that they did not have a diploma from I.T.I and as such they may not be provided the payscale meant for skilled workers who were required to possess both the individual skill and the I.T.I diploma or other equivalent qualifications. They requested that they be allowed at least the pay scale of semi-skilled employees.

Arguments made on behalf of State of UP and Ors

On behalf of the State Government of UP and Others, it was argued that the petitioners were not entitled to a higher payscale. It was argued that the matter of revision of pay scale of the visually impaired chair recaners was placed before the Pay Commission in the year 1998-99 but the Pay Commission had not recommended any separate or special revised pay scale for them.

Since an expert body like, the Pay Commission had not recommended any special pay scale for visually impaired chair recaners, they were not entitled to a higher pay scale. Although the Director, Training and Employment had directed for registration of visually impaired chair recaners in the technical category, but the said letter was issued only to facilitate their registration in Employment Exchanges and the post of Chair Recaners had not been declared as technical posts.

Observations of the Court

After going through the arguments of both the parties, the Court observed that the State government could not ignore the decisions taken by the Finance Department and the State Government under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary. It was stated that the visually impaired persons deserve all support and co-operation and all departments in the State and Central Government would have to fully honor the concerned sections of the Disabilities Act.

It was also noted that visually impaired persons had been working in diverse fields and commended the advocate for the petitioners Mr. Rungta, a visually impaired person for all the support he provided for assisting the Court for reaching its conclusion in this case. Further, reference was also made to Hellen Keller’s (a visually impaired and deaf writer) book “the story of my life” where she has stated “…I cannot do everything, but I can do something and I will not refuse to do that something I can do”.

In the present case, the Court held that since the petitioners are gainfully employed, doing that “something” they could do and were doing it to the best of their ability, they deserved at least the salary and wages admissible to semi-skilled employees and workers of the State Government. It was held that the visually impaired employers working as chair recaners of various departments if the Government of U.P would have to be considered for grant of higher pay scale (i.e. Rs.2610-3540) from the date of presentation of the said Writ Petition.

The petitioners’ pay scale was directed to be revised and they were to be allowed arrears of salary. The opposite parties were to include the post of visually impaired chair recaners in the category of semi-skilled workers, employees while putting the case of other Government servants for revision of pay scales before the concerned Pay Commission. With the above directions, the Court allowed the petition.

Sections Referred:

• Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950

Cases Referred:

• Kunal singh vs. Union of India 2003 AIR SCW 1013
• Anand Bihari vs. Rajasthan SRTC 1991 SCC (L&S0 393