THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8069 of 2010 ORDER: In this writ petition, petitioner, who is a former Conductor of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), questioned the order bearing No.P2/693(1)/07-RNG.II, dated 08.10.2007, retiring him from service on medical grounds and the proceedings bearing No.L4/785(120)2009-HCZ, dated 27.02.2010, rejecting his request for providing him alternative employment in terms of Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (for short ‘the Act’). It is the case of the petitioner that while in service, the petitioner fell sick during the year 2007 and was admitted to APSRTC hospital. Thereafter, he discontinued treatment in the said hospital and took treatment, on his own, in Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad. As he was absent to duty unauthorizedly, the disciplinary proceedings were initiated and the charge sheet, dated 03.08.2007, was issued against him. While the matter stood thus, he submitted applications, dated 01.09.2007 and 06.10.2007 to the respondents categorically stating that he has taken treatment in Osmania General Hospital for mental illness but still his health is not improved, as such, he is not willing to perform the Conductor’s duty and thereby, requested the respondents to drop the charges levelled against him and retire him from service on medical grounds at an early date. Considering the said applications, the Depot Manager, Ranigunj Depot-II, passed the order, dated 08.10.2007 stating that the petitioner is retired from service with effect from 20.09.2007 on medical grounds. Though the petitioner retired on medical grounds on his own, an amount of Rs.1,03,994/- was paid to him vide cheque bearing No.926759, dated 19.11.2008 towards additional monetary benefits and withdrawal of the same is not in dispute. The petitioner, after considerable time, submitted representation, dated 27.03.2009 to the respondents seeking to provide him alternative employment under Section 47 of the Act. As the same was not being considered, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.25320 of 2009. In view of pendency of the said representation, this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the respondents to consider the petitioner’s representation, dated 27.03.2009 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, the respondents issued proceedings, dated 27.02.2010 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for providing him alternative employment. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner submitted representation, dated 27.03.2009 to the respondents and he is entitled to the benefit of providing alternative employment under the provisions of Section 47 of the Act. It is apt to extract Section 47(1) of the Act, which reads as under: 47. Non-discrimination in Government employment:-(1) No establishment shall dispense with, or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires 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. From a reading of the above provision, it is clear that the said provision protects the interests of the employee if he suffers any disability during the course of employment. If the employee suffers any disability during his service, the establishment, which employed such employee shall not dispense with his service or reduce in rank on the ground that he acquired disability. But, in the case on hand, the petitioner cannot seek assistance of the aforesaid provision. This is a case where the petitioner himself made a request for retirement on medical grounds by submitting an application. In that view of the matter, he cannot seek re-employment by taking aid of Section 47 of the Act. When the matter has come up for hearing on 12.04.2010, the same was adjourned to enable the learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC to produce the relevant record. Today, when the matter is taken up, the record is produced. From a perusal of the same, it is evident that the petitioner himself submitted application, dated 01.09.2007 stating that he is not willing to perform the job of Conductor and thereby requested the respondents to retire him on medical grounds. In view of the application referred to above and on perusal of the record, it is clear that it is not a case of dispensing the service of the employee, by the employer, in contravention of the provisions under Section 47 of the Act. The order, dated 08.10.2007 was passed retiring the petitioner from service on medical grounds, acceding to his request. Therefore, the petitioner cannot allege any violation of the provision under Section 47 of the Act, so as to seek relief as prayed by him, after this length of time. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any illegality on the part of the second respondent in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for providing him alternative employment. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 20th APRIL, 2010. Kvni/MRR