HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, BENCH AT JAIPUR
RAVI CHIRANIA, J.
Megha Kanwar, Wife of Shri Surendra Singh Chawra – Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary Department of Finance – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13746 of 2025
Decided On : 03-10-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. employee's disability requires salary payment. (Para 2) |
| 2. court's directive for urgent response noted. (Para 3 , 4 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. rights under the act of 2016 prevent salary withholding. (Para 5 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. violation of employee rights affirmed. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court directs timely payment resolution. (Para 13) |
Order :
RAVI CHIRANIA, J.
1. The Court issued notices to the respondents on 23.09.2025 and Additional Advocate General was directed to file reply in the matter.
2. Looking to the facts of the case that the husband of the petitioner, a Commercial Taxes Officer, suffered a Brain Hemorrhage in the year 2023 and thereafter, he is under treatment and in coma from the last more than two years and the respondents are not paying salary to her husband and also not reimbursing the medical bills without any justified reason, this matter was taken up today as an urgent case.
3. Looking to the serious medical condition of the husband of the petitioner, this Court instructed Mr. Dheeraj Tripathi, Assistant Government Counsel to ensure the presence of respondent No.2 before this Court physically or through VC mode. In view of the above noted circumstances, keeping into consideration the various directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court regarding calling the senior officials in the Court matter physically or through VC, this Court called the concerned official looking to the gravity of the matter as noted above.
4. Mr. Kumarpal Gautam, Finance Secretary, Revenue, having additional charge of Commissioner, Department of Commercial Taxes, appeared through VC before this Court and submitted that he is not aware of the complete facts of the case however, the concerned employee has consumed all his medical and other leaves, therefore, as informed to him by his subordinates, payment of salary might not have been made. He assured this Court that he would look into the matter and would try to resolve the issue at the earliest at his end.
5. Before issuing any directions in this regard to the respondents, it would be apt to discuss the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (for short ‘the Act of 2016’) as applicable to the facts of the present case. Relevant section 20 of the Act of 2016 is reproduced as under:
20. Non-discrimination in employment.—(1) No Government establishment shall discriminate against any person with disability in any matter relating to employment:
Provided that the appropriate Government may, having regard to the type of work carried on in any establishment, by notification and subject to such conditions, if any, exempt any establishment from the provisions of this section.
(2) Every Government establishment shall provide reasonable accommodation and appropriate barrier free and conducive environment to employees with disability.
(3) No promotion shall be denied to a person merely on the ground of disability.
(4) No Government establishment shall dispense with or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during his or her service:
Provided that, if an employee after acquiring disability is not suitable for the post he was holding, shall 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.
(5) The appropriate Government may frame policies for posting and transfer of employees with disabilities.
Section 20 (4) of the Act of 2016 mandates that no government establishment shall dispense with or reduce in rank any employee who acquires a disability during his or her service. The facts of the present case, as noted from the pleadings in the writ petition, shows that petitioner was last performing his duties as Commercial Taxes Officer without any medical problem however, he suffered Brain Hemorrhage in the year 2023 and on account of which he is
Non-discrimination in employment for employees with disabilities is mandated under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, requiring timely salary payments and reimbursements for medical e....
Employer must ensure that an employee with a disability is treated fairly, including salary payment for an absence due to illness, under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
The judgment established the entitlement of a person with high support needs to salary under disability rights Acts, emphasizing non-discrimination and reservation of posts for persons with disabilit....
The court established that the acceptance of monetary benefits under duress does not preclude the right to seek alternative employment under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
The court reinforced the mandatory nature of employment protection for disabled employees under the PWD Act, emphasizing reasonable accommodation and the obligation of employers to pay salaries despi....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.