Facts
The original applicant, Rajbeer Singh, was employed as a Mali with AIIMS and granted temporary status in 1996
Source reference: p. 2-3, para 4On April 8, 2008, he met with an accident during his employment, resulting in a 75% permanent physical impairment
Source reference: p. 3, para 5; p. 7, para 11(III)Although he was regularized in 2009 subject to medical fitness, a medical certificate from AIIMS’s own Department of Physical Medicine recommended light duties
Source reference: p. 3, para 6; p. 8, para 15Despite this, the respondents issued a termination notice on July 9, 2014, and a final termination order on September 5, 2014, based on a Medical Board report declaring him "unfit" for the post of Mali
Source reference: p. 4, para 7; p. 9, para 16Singh challenged the termination but died on August 1, 2016, while the original application (OA) was pending; his legal heirs (the current applicants) were subsequently substituted
Source reference: p. 2, para 2Issues
1. Whether the termination of an employee who acquired a disability during his service is legally sustainable under the Persons with Disabilities Act
Source reference: p. 5, para 9; p. 11-12, para 202. Whether the Tribunal has the jurisdiction to mould the relief to grant consequential benefits to legal heirs following the death of the original applicant
Source reference: p. 5-6, para 10; p. 12, para 21Law Applied
The Tribunal applied Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (and the corresponding Section 20 of the 2016 Act), which prohibits the dispensation of service or reduction in rank of an employee who acquires a disability during service
Source reference: p. 9-11, paras 17-18The court relied on the statutory mandate that such employees must be shifted to another post with the same pay scale or kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable vacancy arises or they reach superannuation
Source reference: p. 10, para 17Furthermore, the Tribunal invoked the principle from Union of India v. B.C. Chaturvedi (1995) 6 SCC, which empowers courts to mould relief to meet the ends of justice based on the specific facts of a case
Source reference: p. 12, para 21Reasoning
The Tribunal reasoned that since Rajbeer Singh admittedly acquired his disability during his employment with the respondents, he was entitled to the protections of the Persons with Disabilities Act
Source reference: p. 11-12, para 20The respondents’ decision to terminate him solely because the Medical Board found him "unfit to perform the duties of a Mali" was a direct violation of Section 47, which requires the employer to accommodate the disabled employee in an alternative post or light duty rather than terminating them
Source reference: p. 9, para 16; p. 12, para 20The Tribunal noted that Singh had already submitted medical recommendations for light duty, which the respondents ignored
Source reference: p. 8-9, paras 15-16Regarding the death of the applicant, the Tribunal found that the illegality of the termination remained, and it was necessary to mould the relief to ensure the legal heirs received the benefits that would have accrued had the applicant not been unlawfully terminated
Source reference: p. 12, para 21-22Holding
The Tribunal allowed the OA and set aside the termination notice dated July 9, 2014, and the order dated September 5, 2014
It held that the original applicant is deemed to have been in service from the date of termination until his death
Source reference: p. 12, para 22(ii)The respondents were directed to pay arrears of pay and allowances for the admissible period to the legal heirs and to process death-cum-retiral benefits in accordance with the rules within eight weeks
Source reference: p. 12-13, para 22(iii-vi)Original Court PDF
RajveervsAll India Institute Of Medical Sciences
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in