DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. JAGROOP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition by the Delhi Transport Corporation is to the award dated January 02, 2013 in I.D. No. 177/1998 whereby the Labour Court has held that the respondent is entitled to the benefit of Section 45 of the 'Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights And Full Participation) Act, 1995' [Act, in short] and also held that he would be entitled to full back wages for the period between May 15, 1991 to the actual date of his retirement, with continuity of service and consequential benefits and other retiremental benefits as per Rules applicable to the status and cadre of the workman, and further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the respondent as exemplary cost. The amount was directed to be paid within two months with interested @ 9 % p.a.

(2.) The facts as noted from the impugned award are that the respondent on October 07, 1990 during anti-reservation period, while going to join his duty at Wazirpur Depot, met with an accident. He was admitted in the Rohtak Medical College by some passengers. He regained his consciousness after 24 hours of the accident. He was advised complete rest for about three months. During the accident, his left feet little finger was damaged. He was advised to do some light job. He joined his duties on January 02, 1991 and did work till April 04, 1991. He was declared medically unfit by the Medical Board of the petitioner and accordingly, on May 15, 1991, he was prematurely retired from the petitioner-Corporation's service. The Medical College, Rohtak declared him fully fit and issued fitness certificate on July 29, 1991. He made a representation to the petitioner, who had asked his preference to perform duties of Peon and Store Attendant. It is noted that vide order dated December 17, 1991, his representation was rejected. He sent a demand notice on March 17, 1992. The same was not replied to. It was the case of the respondent that on January 20, 1992, the petitioner issued a circular for providing alternative jobs to medically disabled drivers and it was also mentioned in that circular that if any workman refuses to accept the alternative job, he may be retired prematurely.

(3.) He raised an industrial dispute challenging his illegal retirement on March 23, 1992 before a Conciliation Officer.