THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.NO.13653 OF 2003 O R D E R Heard both the counsel. 2. The case of the petitioner as stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is that he was appointed as badlifiller in the respondent – Singareni Collieries Limited, Godavarikhani on 10.11.1973 and after serving in different posts, and after passing the required tests, was eventually promoted as Head Overman on 1.10.1993. During the course of his service, he had indifferent health for a period of two days and after the necessary tests at the Godavarikhani Area Hospital, on the ground that he had malfunctioning of heart, he was referred to Osmania General Hospital on 25.11.1997, where the doctors opined that he had no heart problem and that he can discharge duties normally, but advised him light work for one month. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of report given by the Osmania General Hospital, again the 3rd respondent – Medical Superintendent, asked him to admit as inpatient at area Hospital, Kothagudem and accordingly he was admitted and discharged. But a medical report was sent on 1.6.1998 stating that the case of the petitioner was reviewed by the Medical Board and declared him as unfit to discharge his duties as Head Overman. Consequent upon the intervention of the union on 10.8.1998, the petitioner’s case was again referred to medical Board at Main hospital, Kothagudem, with regard to his fitness for surface job and the 3rd respondent by his letter dated 1.9.1998 sent letter to the company stated that he examined the petitioner and found fit to work as instructor (surface) at MVTC. The case of the petitioner is that in the light of the letter dated 1.9.1998 of the 3rd respondent and also in view of the settlement dated 5.7.1999 arrived at between the union and management under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 194,7 he ought to have been provided the post of Instructor (Surface) under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. But again he was called on 18.11.1999 to undergo medical examination before the Company’s Medical Board at Main Hospital, Kothagudem and he was examined by the Medical Board and the specific case of the petitioner is that one Dr. Sumangali examined him and sent repot to the respondents 1 and 2 stating that he was fit to discharge duties as Head Oveman underground the mine. Without considering the report given by the Medical Board at Main Hospital, Kothagudem, again the petitioner was called to undergo test before the Medical Board and accordingly he underwent test and a report was given on 31.10.2000 holding that the petitioner is medically unfit for any employment in the company. The case of the petitioner is that he is fit to discharge duties as Head Overman underground the mine. In the writ affidavit it is further stated that the petitioner was again called by the Medical Board and eventually he was issued order dated 23.3.2001 stating that he was found fit for the job of Telephone Operator Trainee (Surface). Aggrieved by the order dated 23.3.2001 in appointing him as telephone operator, he filed the present writ petition. 3. No counter affidavit is filed. The learned standing counsel for the respondent – Management vehemently contended that the petitioner is found unfit to work as Head Overman by the company’s medical board and hence, he was provided with alternative employment of telephone operator. She contended that the ailment with which the petitioner is suffering does not fall under the disabilities provided under the Act and hence he cannot claim benefit of protection of pay under Section 47 of the said Act. Therefore, she sought to dismiss the writ petition. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he is medically fit to discharge his duties as Head Over and that the doctors who examined him at Osmania Hospital, Hyderabad and also the doctor by name Dr.Sumangali member of Company’s Medical Board, who examined him at Main Hospital, Kothagudem, opined that he is fit to discharge his duties as Head Overman. The grievance of the petitioner is that the report of Dr.Sumangali, was kept at Corporate Office and the respondents have taken no action. His further case is that the 3rd respondent had reviewed his case and by letter dated 1.9.1998 in proceedings CHK/Corp./MED/U/134/3748 addressed to the Head Office, reported that “He has was reviewed by Medical Board Main Hospital, Kothagudem. As GM, RG-I has informed in his letter No.GM/RG-1/78/718 dated 19.8.1998 that Shri S.Smbasiva Rao, Head Overman will be employed in MVTC RG-I as Instructor and he need not go down the mine. He was examined and found fit to work as Instructor (surface) at MVTC”. 5. Therefore, from the letter addressed by the 3rd respondent it could be seen that General Manager has informed in his letter dated 19.8.1998 that the petitioner will be employed in MVTC RG-I as Instructor and that he need not go down the mine and accordingly, the 3rd respondent found him fit to work as Instructor (Surface) at MVTC. In these circumstances, and in the light of the agreements entered into between the union and Management under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, the respondent – management ought to have considered the case of the petitioner for providing Instructor (surface), by protecting his pay. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is even now ready to undergo test by the Medical Board and that the case of the petitioner is that he is medically fit to work as Head Overman. 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances, and in the interest of justice, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: 1. The respondent – Management shall constitute a Medical Board and examine the petitioner with regard to his fitness to work as Head Overman underground the mine. During the said examination, the petitioner is also permitted to produce evidence with regard to his fitness and the same shall also be considered by the Board, before arriving at a conclusion. 2. In case the petitioner is found medically unfit to hold the post of a Head Overman underground the mine, having regard to his length of service, his case shall be considered for providing alternative employment by protecting his pay in the light of the letter 3rd respondent dated 1.9.1998 in proceedings CHK/Corp./MED/U/134/3748 addressed to the Head Office and also the settlements arrived at between the union and Management under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 3. The above exercise shall be completed in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. No order as to costs. AVS ------------------------------- 28—06—2011