SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Jhk) 251

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, N.N.TIWARI
Daroga Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


JUDGMENT

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


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top