IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2341 of 2010 1. RAJESH KUMAR DIXIT S/O SHRI BASHIST NARAYAN DIXIT R/O VILL.- JHAWAN, P.O.- SAHULI, P.S. HASANPURA, DISTT.- SIWAN Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 2. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CENTRAL RESERVED POLICE FORCE, BIHAR CENTRE, PATNA 3. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE GROUP CENTRE, CENTRAL RESERVED POLICE FORCE, MUZAFFARPUR, BIHAR ----------- 03/ 09.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Union of India. 2. Petitioner was initially recruited in the C.R.P.F., but having become disabled, he has been invalidated out from service with effect from 28.2.2010 under orders dated 27.1.2010, which is impugned in this application and is contained in Annexure-9. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that authorities while invalidating him out from the Force, should have considered his case in the light of the instructions contained in Permanent Order no. 7/99 dated 6.5.1999, Annexure-10 to the supplementary affidavit and he could be continued against a post which is not required to enter into combat. 4. Counsel for the Union of India has opposed the prayer, with reference to the averments made in the counter affidavit. He states that the Permanent Order no. 7/99 dated 6.5.1999, Annexure-10 to the supplementary affidavit has no relevance in the matter, as in terms of the notification of the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment dated 10.9.2002, the 2 Combatant personnel of the Central Para Military Forces, including C.R.P.F. have been exempt from the operation of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in terms of the provisions contained in proviso to Section 33 of the Act and in the light of the said provision, notification dated 10.9.2002 has been issued and the case of the petitioner cannot be considered in the light of the Permanent Order no. 7/99 dated 6.5.1999, Annexure-10 to the supplementary affidavit for continuing him in service on a post which is not required to enter into combat. 5. Aforesaid submission of the counsel for the Union of India is being refuted by the counsel for the petitioner, as in rejoinder, he submits that exemption notification is dated 10.9.2002, whereas the scheme for the disabled was formulated by the C.R.P.F. itself under Permanent Order no. 7/99 effective from 6.5.1999 and notwithstanding the provisions of the Act and the exemption notification, petitioner’s case be considered in the light of the Permanent Order no. 7/99 dated 6.5.1999, Annexure- 10 to the supplementary affidavit. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, I permit the petitioner to represent before the competent authority of the C.R.P.F., who should consider his case in the light of the Permanent Order no. 7/99 dated 6.5.1999, 3 Annexure-10 to the supplementary affidavit and pass appropriate orders in this regard in accordance with law, as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order. 7. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V.N. Sinha, J.)