The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for evidence and finding of fact before applying the provisions of the Act, and the premature consideration of an exemption notification.

A.S. BOPANNA, J.

1. The appellants, Union of India and other officers, who were the respondents in WP(C) 4598/2015, are before this Court assailing the order dated 19.8.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge, having accepted the contention put forth by the petitioner, has taken into consideration the provisions contained in Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full participation) Act, 1995 (for short, Act of 1995) and has directed the respondents to take a decision in terms of the provisions under Section 47 of the Act of 1995. The effect of the decision of the learned Single Judge is to nullify the effect of enquiry and to grant benefit in that regard. The appellants, therefore, being aggrieved by the order are before this Court in this appeal.

2. Heard Mr. SC Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the appellants as well as Mr. PK Tiwari, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. AR Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the appeal papers.

3. The appellants herein had initiated the proceedings by issuing charge-sheet dated 8.7.2010 against the respondent No.1 herein alleging misconduct and, in that regard, had proceeded to enquire into the matter. Ultimately, on submission of the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority had issued the notice dated 7.8.2015 enclosing the report. It is, at this stage, the respondent herein had approached this Court assailing the action of the appellants herein contending that the charges as levelled against the respondent No.1 herein cannot constitute misconduct. In that regard, it was contended that the respondent No.1 was suffering from a mental disorder known as “Obsessive & Compulsive Disorder” (OCD) in medical terms. In that light, it was contended that if the charges as levelled against the petitioner are taken note of, the same, even if had occurred, was due to such mental condition of the respondent No.1 and therefore, it was contended that the same not being a misconduct, initiation of the enquiry and subsequent action was not justified. The learned Single Judge, while accepting the said contention, was of the opinion that if Section 47 of the Act of 1995 is kept in mind, in view of such disability, a decision in that regard was required to be taken by the appellants herein.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants, while assailing such conclusion reached by the learned Single Judge, would contend that the contention of such mental disorder of the respondent No.1 herein had been made for the first time in the writ petition. It is his contention that neither in the reply to the charge-sheet, nor in the reply to the enquiry report that had been submitted, such contention had been taken and in that light, the learned counsel would contend that the learned Single Judge ought not to have accepted the same and relief ought not to have been granted.

5. During consideration of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellants has also sought to rely on the original records that had been secured by him relating to the enquiry, to contend that the respondent No.1, in fact, had tendered his statement before the enquiry officer and even at that stage, he had not referred to his illness which is indicated presently and therefore, the only action that was required to be taken was to conclude the enquiry proceeding by passing the final order and as such, the order of the learned Single Judge ought to be interfered with at this stage. Hence, it is contended that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is liable to be set aside and the appellants should be directed to proceed with the enquiry from the stage where the enquiry had stopped and from the stage where action of the appellants had been interfered by this Court through the order of the learned Single Judge.

6. Learned senior counsel for the respondents, however, seeks to support the order passed by the learned Single