- (1.) The petitioner, who joined the service of the respondents-Corporation as Driver in 1974, applied for retirement on 21.10.2003 due to defective vision, and he was retired from service on 27.10.2003. Before he retired from service, the respondents issued notification in PD No. 14/2003, dated 08.10.2003, informing that the Board vide Resolution No. 128/2003, dated 28.07.2003, has accorded approval for amending Regulation 6A(5)(b) of the APSRTC Employees (Service) Regulations, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations'), and notified the amendment, which provided better benefits to medical unfit Drivers. In terms of the above amended Regulation 6A(5)(b) of the Regulations, the petitioner states that he took retirement and applied for grant of additional monetary benefits in lieu of alternative employment, as provided under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, but the respondents did not pay the additional monetary benefits. The petitioner states that the respondents issued another Circular in PD No. 40/2005, dated 26.08.2005, after obtaining approval from the Government, reiterating the benefits payable under notification in PD No. 14/2003, dated 08.10.2003. While so, the 2nd respondent, namely the Regional Manager, on the clarification sought by the 2nd respondent, namely the Depot Manager, whether additional monetary benefits can be paid to the petitioner, vide proceedings dated 10.07.2006, informed that the petitioner cannot be paid the additional monetary benefits as he was found medically unfit on 07.10.2003 i.e. a day before the amended Regulation 6A(5)(b) of the Regulations, came into force i.e. 08.10.2003. Assailing these proceedings, the petitioner filed this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-APSRTC.
(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner was medically invalidated on 07.10.2003, he having been retired from service w.e.f. 27.10.2003, long after the amended Regulation 6A(5)(b) of the Regulations coming into force i.e. from 08.10.2003, is entitled to be granted the additional monetary benefits, and the action of the respondents in rejecting his case for grant of additional monetary benefits on the ground that he was found medically unfit on 07.10.2003 i.e. a day before the amended Regulation 6A(5)(b) of the Regulations came into force i.e. on 08.10.2003, is illegal and arbitrary, and more so when the amended Regulation 6A(5)(b) of the Regulations, which provided for grant of additional monetary benefits, came to be approved by the Government with effect from 08.10.2003. He, thus prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the writ petition be allowed.
(3.) The respondents filed counter. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-APSRTC reiterating the stand taken by the respondents in their counter submitted the amended Regulation 6A(5)(b) of the Regulations came into force from 08.10.2003. Though the petitioner was retired from service on 27.10.2003, i.e. twenty days after notifying the amendment on 27.10.2003, the fact remains, he was found medically unfit on 07.10.2003, and having regard to the fact that the amendment came into effect from 08.10.2003, i.e. a day after the petitioner was found medically unfit, he was not given the benefit, and no exception can be taken to the impugned proceedings, which informed that the petitioner is not entitled to the additional monetary benefits.;