SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, N.N.TIWARI
Daroga Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.
1. The petitioner was in the services of the Border Security Force (hereinafter referred to as the B.S.F.). In the extremist attack in Jammu & Kashmir State, he sustained bullet injuries resulting into complete blindness. He was declared 100% disabled. By the impugned order No. A 228/Estt-1/2004/33930-39 dated 31st December, 2004, he has been made to retire from service on the ground of physical disability, declaring him unfit for the services w.e.f. 31st December, 2004 under the cloak of Rule 25 of the B.S.F. Rules, 1969, whereas the petitioner claimed protection under the provision of "The Persons with Disabilities (equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Disabilities Act, 1995).
2. In the present case, the questions arise for determination are:
(a) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get protection under Section 47 of the Disabilities act?
(b) Whether the impugned order of retirement dated 31st December, 2004 is illegal and arbitrary ? Relevant Facts:
3. The petitioner was in the services of B.S.F. He was appointed as a constable oh 25th May, 1986 and after training was sent to Pun
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.