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

2025 Supreme(P&H) 1798

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.
Jaswinder Singh – Petitioner 
Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd And Others – Respondents 
CWP-11291-2025
Decided On : 08-08-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Pawan Kumar Sr. Advocate With Mr. Vidushi Kumar,
Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, Advocate
Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, Aag, Punjab.

Employees acquiring disability during service are entitled to promotion benefits under the PH quota, irrespective of the timing of their disability acquisition as confirmed by the RPWD Act.

Headnote:(A) Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - Sections 20, 33, and 34 - Promotion denied to employee with acquired disability - The employee, previously promoted was overlooked despite qualifying under PH category - Courts ruled benefits should extend to those acquiring disability in service - Directly contravenes legislative provisions. (Paras 8-12)

(B) Employment - Non-discrimination - Employer to promote disabled employees, irrespective of when disability was acquired - Court emphasized the necessity of consideration for all under PH quota. (Paras 11-14)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Junior Engineer who acquired 75% disability due to a motor vehicle accident, was denied promotion to Assistant Engineer as juniors were promoted, despite being eligible under PH quota. (Para 1-2)

Findings of Court:
The petitioner is entitled to promotion under the PH quota, as the denial was against legal protections provided by the RPWD Act. Respondents failed to substantiate claims against the petitioner’s promotion eligibility. (Paras 19)

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to promotion under PH category despite the disability being acquired during service. (Para 8)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court found that a person with a disability acquired during service is entitled to the same promotional benefits as others under the PH category. Denial based on when disability was acquired is not permissible. (Paras 14-18)

Result: Writ petition allowed; promotion ordered with benefits to be granted. (Para 19)

JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the speaking order dated 11.03.2025 (Annexure P-18) and further prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.1 and 2 to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant Engineer, Electrical in the 4% quota under physically handicap (in short ‘PH’) category as juniors of the petitioner have already been promoted on 16.07.2023 (Annexure P-5).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the juniors to the petitioner have been promoted, whereas, the petitioner has been denied the promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer Electrical meant for persons with disabilities in view of Sections 33 and 34 of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (in short ‘RPWD Act’). The case of the petitioner is identical with the other persons who have been promoted in the physically handicap category. Initially the petitioner was appointed to the post of Junior Engineer under the Schedule Class category in the respondent-Corporation on 17.06.2014. Thereafter, the petitioner met with a motor vehicle accident and has suffered serious injuries which caused the petitioner’s permanent disability to the extent of 75 per cent. The petitioner has been issued a disability certificate on 18.10.2019, by Chief Medical Officer, Sangrur (Annexure P-3). Further, on 26.02.2021, the respondent- Corporation published a tentative seniority list of technical subordinates, in which the petitioner was placed at Sr. No.612, whereas, three persons namely Sh.Amardeep Singh, Sh. Sonu Sharma and Sh.Amar Singh were placed at Sr. Nos. 638, 660 and 629 respectively, have been promoted vide office order No.140/BEG-I, dated 16.07.2023 under physically handicap category, leaving behind the petitioner.

3. Further, being aggrieved, petitioner had submitted multiple representations for seeking similar benefit as has been granted to the juniors of the petitioner in the handicap category. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court by filing CWP No.31808 of 2024 and vide final order dated 26.11.2024 this Court has directed the respondent-Corporation to consider and decide the claim made by the petitioner in representation dated 27.08.2024 in accordance with law, by passing a speaking order. Further, the petitioner has laid a specific reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in CWP-20174 of 2023, Sukhmandar Singh Versus Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others rendered on 23.08.2024 in the aforesaid representation. However, while passing the speaking order, enigmatically no reference has been made to the judgment relied upon by the petitioner or to the specific instances and the judicial precedents relied upon by the petitioner. Rather, it has been conveyed to the petitioner in the speaking order that the Government of Punjab has sought clarification vide letter dated 22.06.2023 from the Government of India, that the matter of adopting the instructions issued by Govt. of India, whereby it was stated that the persons who acquired disability during his/her service is entitled to get benefits of reservation as a PwD is still under consideration and his case would be considered for the promotion after the clarification is received from the Government of Punjab (Annexure P-18). Further, it is stated in the Annexure P-18 at para-10 that no person junior to the petitioner has been promoted under schedule caste category.

4. Learned counsel further refers to representations (Annexures P-8 and P-12) and his representation was sent to Executive Engineer Distribution Division, Sunam vide Endst No.4764 dated 13.11.2019 for further necessary action. Thereafter, communication was made between the concerned authorities of the respondent-Corporation regarding entry of the petitioner in handicap category in the seniority list. On 11.

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 Back to top