You are at eyeway.org : inform : acts and policies : other laws : judicial interpretations and interventions: court judgements : gujarat high court

Court judgements: Gujarat High Court

Employment

1. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation v. Gopal Motambhaia Patel
(2003) XXIII 3 Gujarat Law Herald 745
Special Civil Application No.2726/2003
Decided on: 10.04.2003
Gujarat High Court
Judge: H.K.Rathod, J

Fact: Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (GSRTC) challenged the decision of the Labour Court to set aside the order of termination of services of driver Gopal Motambhaia who became a paralysed person and also the direction to make arrangements for reinstatement on the post equivalent to the post of driver with light work and with continuity in service, protecting the existing wages and granting 85 per cent of the back wages. GSRTC claimed that the decision of labour court is contrary to the policy laid down by the Corporation. A workman can be considered for an alternative equal post in case of inability occurring in case of accidental injury during the course of service. Besides it was argued that the financial position of the Corporation was weak and Labour Court had not given consideration to this fact.

Held: The termination of the services of the employee who acquired paralysis during his service period was without considering the provisions existing in sec 47of the Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. [According to the Act, no establishment shall dispense with, or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires disability during his service. If he is not suitable to the present post means he could be shifted to some other post with the same pay scale and service benefits. Further, if he is not possible to adjust to any of the available posts, he must be kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable post is available or he attains the age of superannuation, which ever is earlier]. The Labour Court is not bound by the policy of the corporation. It had the right to consider the settlement issue of the livelihood of workman. The argument of weak financial position of the Corporation cannot be taken into consideration because there are many other ways and means for effecting the economy measures of the Corporation than termination of service of a disabled worker. So the court cannot observe any irregularity in Labour Court decisions. The decisions are just, so called off any interference by the court.

go to top

Back to Court Judgements Menu

If you are using a screen reader, you can jump to the navigational links to other areas of the site by clicking here

Eyeway intends building a community where people can share and learn from each other. If you would like to share your experiences about the Persons with Disabilities Act with others, please send us your write-up at inspiration@eyeway.org. We shall include it as part of our website.

Printer-friendly version | Mail this page to a friend