IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2011 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13039 of 2011(D) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- S. BIJU, MELETHIL VEEDU, PAYYACODU, OYOOR P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. (CONDUCTOR, CHADAYAMANGALAM DEPOT). BY ADV. SRI.N.SASIDHARAN UNNITHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023. 2. ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CHADAYAMANGALA DEPOT., KOLLAM DISTRICT-695 038. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.V.V. NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC, KSRTC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. ........................................... W.P.(C).NO.13039 OF 2011 ............................................. Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2011. JUDGMENT Petitioner is a conductor under the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. He met with an accident on 10.1.2007 and according to him, he acquired 50% permanent physical disability on account of the injuries sustained in the said accident. Ext.P5 is the disability certificate. After the said accident, he was assigned light duty. The main contention of the petitioner is that he is entitled to get suitable alternative employment (light duty) under the Corporation in terms of Section 47 of the Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Right and Full Participation) Act. Seeking such benefit, he has already approached the respondents by filing Ext.P9 representation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to confine his prayers to one for a direction to the respondents to consider and pass orders on Ext.P9 expeditiously. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and W.P.(C).NO.13039 OF 2011 : 2 : also learned standing counsel. Considering the fact that the petitioner has already produced Ext.P5 disability certificate before the respondents and submitted Ext.P9 representation seeking alternative employment (light duty) under the Corporation, by virtue of the provisions under Section 47 of of the Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Right and Full Participation) Act, I do not think it is necessary to consider the contentions raised in this writ petition on merits at this stage. Essentially the question of application of Section 47 would arise only if the petitioner is found unsuitable for the post he is holding. Necessity to shift to some other post would arise only in such a circumstance. That is a matter to be examined by the respondents taking into account Ext.P5 disability certificate and also Ext.P9 representation submitted by the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P9 and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P.(C).NO.13039 OF 2011 : 3 : The respondents shall also consider whether the petitioner could be assigned light duty till a decision is taken on Ext.P9. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. cl