HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.4871 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.07.2011 **** Jaspal Singh . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. SK Garg Narwana, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. BS Chahal, DAG Punjab **** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner is a Class-IV employee in the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Punjab. He is a physically-challenged person suffering with 60% permanent disability of the following nature:- “Petitioner Sh. Jaspal Singh son of Sh. Baldev Ram resident of Khiala Kalan Distt. Mansa is old case of injury Rt. Elbow & Rt hand leading to flexion deformity of the Rt elbow with restricted movements (from 70 to 90 only) & deformity & stiffness of Rt wrist joint & deformity of Rt wrist & stiffness & restricted movement of all the fingers of Rt. Hand. He had been operated upon & skin grafting was done. He is permanently physically handicapped person & is suffering from 60% (sixty percent) permanent physically disability as per Certificate issued by Civil Surgeon, Mansa vide his No.Hand/93/342 dated 10.11.94 (R-3).” CWP No.4871 of 2008.doc - 2 – (2). In view of the nature of permanent physical disability, reproduced above, the petitioner has been held to be unfit for appointment to the post of Driver. (3). The aggrieved petitioner has approached this Court. (4). The respondents have filed their reply/affidavit. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard. (5). In my considered view and having regard to the nature of permanent disability suffered by the petitioner, the plea taken by the respondents on formation of a bona fide opinion that the petitioner is unsuitable to work as Driver, cannot be termed unreasonable, unfair or arbitrary. (6). No interference by a writ Court in such like matters is, therefore, called for. (7). However, this shall not preclude the petitioner to seek his appointment to any other Class-III post for which he is otherwise suitable and fit to perform duties and the respondents shall consider the claim of the petitioner on the very first opportunity for such an appointment in accordance with the law/Rules. (8). Ordered accordingly. (9). The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Dasti. 08.07.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge