- (1.) THE first respondent was appointed as a Lab Assistant in the Research designs and Standards Organisation (RDSO), Ministry of Railways, in the year 1972 and was subsequently promoted as Junior Research Assistant in 1977 and Senior Research Assistant in 1983.
(2.) THE first Respondent (referred to as the 'respondent' as he is the only contesting respondent) was selected for the next higher post of Chief research Assistant, and by order dated 30. 6. 1997, he was promoted to the said post with the condition that his promotion will be effective from the date of submission of fit certificate in B-1 medical category. The medical classifications for various categories of non-gazetted staff of rdso, revised with a view to rationalize the medical standards, were notified by the RDSO, Ministry of Railways, by Office Order No. 4/1990 dated 19. 7. 1990. The annexures to the said office order stated that the committee constituted to decide upon the standards of medical examination had followed the following guidelines in rationalising the medical standards : (i) to the extent possible, the same medical standards were fixed for all RSDO staff of same capacity, doing similar type of work; (ii) the requirements stipulated in the Medical Manual with respect to the interest of public safety and administration, as also the interests of the employee himself and his fellow workers were taken into account while fixing the medical standards; and (iii) any possibility of medical decategorisation during promotion were obviated/minimized,while deciding upon the medical standards. The committee had also recommended that in cases where a medical category, higher than that was then being followed, was recommended, the RDSO employees in those medical categories who were in service on 1. 6. 1990 should be granted relaxation at the discretion of the ADG. The medical standards that was being followed till introduction of revised medical standards and the revised medical standards that was introduced by office order dated 19. 7. 1990, for Research Assistants, were as follows: JUDGEMENT_1002_TLPRE0_2009Html1.htm The main distinction between B1 and B2 medical categories referred to above was that colour perception was a requirement prescribed for B-1 category but not for B2 category. When the promotion order dated 30. 6. 1999 required the respondent to submit B-1 Medical Category 'fit' certificate, the respondent filed objections contending that in the existing RDSO environment, the nature of work prescribed for the posts of JRA, SRA and CRA was the same, and as he was already cleared for B2 medical category, it was not necessary for him to secure fitness in the higher medical category of B1. By replies dated 24. 7. 1987 and 24. 11. 1997, the Directorate informed him that the different medical categories were prescribed in pursuance of rationalisation of medical standards, taking into account the requirements of the job, as also the safety and welfare of the public, fellow workers and the concerned employee himself. He was therefore once again called upon to present himself before the authorized Medical Officer for medical test and certification.
(3.) BEING aggrieved, the respondent filed OA No. 395/1998 before the central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, praying that the promotion order dated 30. 6. 1997 to the extent it required him to produce Fit certificate in B-1 medical category and the consequential memos/orders dated 7. 7. 1997, 24. 11. 1997 and 17. 7. 1998 requiring him to present himself before the concerned medical officers for examination, be quashed. He also sought quashing of the office order No. 4/1990 dated 19. 7. 1990 insofar as it related to classification of medical category in respect of Research assistants. The Tribunal by order dated 20. 5. 2005 dismissed the said application as being devoid of any merit. The Tribunal held that the rationalization of medical standards prescribed in Office Order dated 19. 7. 1990 was on the basis of recommendations of a Committee constituted for that purpose, keeping in view the job requirements and the interests of the employee concerned as also other employees, and therefore it did not suffer from any infirmity. It also held that unless the respondent obtained the required B-1 category fit certificate, he will not be fulfilling the required medical standard for the post of Chief Research Assistant. The respondent filed W. P. No. 1800/2005 before the Allahabad High court, challenging the order of the Tribunal. Before the High Court, the respondent raised a new contention based on section 47 (2) of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full participation) Act, 1995 (for short 'the Act') which provided that "no promotion shall be denied to a person merely on the ground of his disability". His contention was that the B1 medical category was of a higher standard than B2, as it required colour perception in addition to the requirements prescribed for B2 category; that lack of colour perception or reduced colour perception was a 'disability'; and that as he was otherwise qualified, having regard to section 47 (2), promotion could not be denied to him on the ground of any disability which existed with reference to B1 medical standard. The said contention found favour with the High Court and by order dated 8. 11. 2006, it allowed the writ petition. The High Court held that having regard to section 47 (2) of the Act, as explained by this Court in union of India v. Sanjay Kumar Jain [2004 (6) SCC 708], no person could be denied promotion merely on the ground of disability unless there was a notification exempting the establishment from the provisions of section 47 of the Act; and that as there was no such notification exempting RDSO from the provisions of section 47 of the Act, the respondent could not be denied promotion. It therefore issued a direction that if the respondent submitted himself for medical examination and was found fit for B2 Medical category, he should not be denied promotion on the ground that he did not fulfil the requirements of B1 medical category. The said order is challenged by the employer in this appeal by special leave.;