THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.NO.1507 OF 2000 O R D E R Heard both the counsel. 2. This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in M.III- 1/2000-EC.I dated 29.1.2000 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice. 3. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioner joined as Constable in Central Reserve Police Force (for short “C.R.P.F.”) on 1.4.1988 and after undergoing training, worked at different places. While so during June, 1990 when the battalion was posted at Jammu and Kashmir and the petitioner was on escort duty to Assistant Commandant (Deputy S.P.) Sri Lakhan Singh, extremists threw a hand grenade and a splinter pierced into his left thigh and immediately he was admitted in Army Hospital, Batwara Chowk, Sriniagar and subsequently as the pain did not subside, he applied for leave for 30 days from 16.11.1990 to 15.12.1990 and went to his native place and there, he again met with an accident and hence extended leave for about 6 to 7 months and after reporting to duty, he was entrusted with light duties like night guard, telephone operator, doc runner, company writer etc. at the company office. Subsequently on 27.7.199 a Medical Board was constituted and opined that he can be continued to perform light duties, but however recommended to refer him to the Medical Invalidation Board and the said Board was constituted on 18.12.1999 and on its recommendation, medical invalidation notice was issued to the petitioner on 30.12.1999 vide proceedings No.M.III- 1/99-EC-I, proposing to invalidate him from service, providing an opportunity to prefer an appeal for re- examination, pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted fitness certificate to the respondents through his letter dated 17.1.2000, but without constituting the Medical Review Board, the impugned order dated 29.1.2000 was passed invalidating the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that as per the fitness certificate given by the Civil Surgeon of the Gandhi Hospital he is fit to perform lighter jobs like clerical duties, telephone operator, bus conductor, canteen salesman etc and hence his case may be considered in any one of the said posts and his further case is that Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (for short ‘the Act’) stipulates that no establishment shall dispense with, or reduce in rank an employee who acquires a disability during his service. Therefore, the petitioner in the writ petition prays for consideration of his case in any of the posts referred to above in the view of Section 47 of the Act. 4. The respondents filed a detailed counter and denied the averments of the petitioner and also disputed the injury sustained to the petitioner. The tenor of the counter affidavit is that as the petitioner was found unfit for combatant duties, the Departmental Rehabilitation Board on 27.7.1999 while recommending for medical invalidation also recommended for retaining him in the department for one year so as to get pensionary benefits and that there is no relaxation of duties like raid, ambush, night patrolling, convoy protection in terrorist areas to police personnel till the age of superannuation. However, the petitioner was assigned lighter duties on humanitarian grounds for more than ten years and that they have not violated any rules or particularly rules of natural justice before passing the impugned order. With these averments, the writ petition was sought to be dismissed. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterating the averments made in the writ affidavit sought for setting aside the impugned order. She also relied on the judgment of a Division Bench of this court in W.P.No.13280/2000 dated 19.11.2002 and also the judgment of the learned single Judge of this court in W.P.No.19356/1999 dated 19.1.2000. She further submitted that by virtue of the interim directions of this court, the petitioner has been allowed to perform duties, which are lighter in nature in view of the disability sustained by him. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that C.R.P.F. has been exempted for the operation of Section 47 of the Act and to that effect a notification was issued by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment on 10.9.2002. 7. From the above the undisputed facts are that the petitioner joined in service as constable in Central Reserve Police Force and sustained injury while on duty at Jammu and Kashmir during June, 1990 and subsequently he met with accident while on leave and after joining duty he was entrusted with lighter duties and though the respondents disputed the nature of injuries sustained by the petitioner, the fact remains that subsequently the Medical Invalidation Board issued notice dated 30.12.1999 proposing to invalidate the petitioner and eventually the impugned order was passed invalidating the petitioner from service on the ground that he was unfit for combatant duties. It is not in dispute that as on the date of passing the impugned order, C.R.P.F. is governed by the provisions of the Act, whereunder as per Section 47 of the Act, it is obligatory on the part of the authorities to shift the employee who acquires disability during his service to any suitable post with same pay scale and service benefits and in case no such suitable post is available, to keep him on a supernumerary post until a suitable post is available or he attains the age of superannuation, whichever is earlier. Though C.R.P.F. is exempted from the said provision as per the notification dated 10.9.2002, it will have only prospective effect and as on the date of passing the impugned order, the provisions of Section 47 of the Act, were very much applicable to C.R.P.F. Hence, the notification exempting C.R.P.F. from Section 47, cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case. In the present case, the impugned order invalidating the petitioner was passed on 29.1.2000, oblivious of the provisions under the Act. 8. A Division Bench of this court in U.C. Papaiah vs. Union of India (W.P.No.13280/2000 dated 19.11.2002) under similar circumstances where a constable in C.R.P.F., Group Center, Rangareddy District was removed on medical invalidation grounds and the Department relied on the exemption granted to Section 47 of the Act, directed the authorities to reinstate the petitioner therein into service with all the attendant benefits. The said judgment of the Division Bench, which is short, is extracted as under for ready reference: “1. In this writ petition the Office Order No.M.III.I/2000-Ec-I, dated 6.5.2000 issued by the Additional Deputy Inspector General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Group Centre, Rangareddy District, 2nd respondent in the writ petition, removing the petitioner from service on medical invalidation ground is assailed. It is contended that the Central Reserve Police force is an “establishment” as defined in clause (K) of Section 2 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) and therefore the removal of the petitioner from service on medical invalidation ground could be justified in terms of the provisions of Section 47 of the Act. However, the learned Standing Counsel for the Government of India has passed an order on 10.9.2002 exempting all combatant personnel of Central Para Military Forces from the application of the Act. That order of the Government of India would not come to the aid of the Central Reserve Police Force to support the impugned action because as on the date of the impugned order i.e., 6.5.2000 admittedly the Central Reserve Police force was an establishment within the meaning of that term and it was governed by the provisions of the Act including Section 47. Sub-section (1) of Section 47 of the Act reads as follows: “47. Non-discrimination in Government employments:- No establishment shall dispense with, or reduce in rank, an employee who acquired a disability during his service: Provided that, if an employee, after acquiring disability is not suitable for the post he was holding, could be shifted to some other post with the same pay scale and service benefits” Provided further that if it is not possible to adjust the employee against any post, he may be kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable post is available or he attains the age of superannuation, whichever is earlier.” In terms of sub-section (1) the petitioner’s services should not have been dispensed with by the authorities of the Central Reserve Police Force on medical invalidation ground. There is nothing on record to show that before passing the impugned order, the authorities of the Central Reserve Police Force examined whether the petitioner could be appointed to some other post with the same pay scale and service benefits as contemplated under the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 47 of the Act. In the result, we allow the writ petition and quash the impugned order and direct the respondent – authorities to reinstate the petitioner into service with all attendant benefits – pecuniary and otherwise. However, this order shall not come in the way of the respondent – authorities from implementing the exemption order dated 10.09.2000, if they so decide. No order as to costs.” 9. In view of the above facts and circumstances and the judgment of the Division Bench of this court, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. No costs. AVS ------------------------- ----- 02.08.2006