JUDGMENT :

RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J.

1. Heard Sri Shireesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gopal Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents-Bank.

2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 16.04.2022 passed by the opposite party No. 1 transferring as many as 163 employees in different Zones serving at Central Bank of India from one place to another. The petitioner, whose name finds place at Serial No. 132, has been transferred from Lucknow to Cooch Behar, Kolkota. The petitioner has also assailed the order dated 20.04.2022 whereby he has been directed to be relieved from his present place of posting.

3. The petitioner is serving on the post of Officer (Scale-II) in Central Bank of India.

4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Shireesh Kumar, has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No. 3 of the writ petition, which is Unique Disability ID issued by the Competent Authority of the Government of India relating to wife of the petitioner, namely, Smt. Priya Chaturvedi, who is permanent disable person having 100% disability.

5. Further attention of this Court has been drawn by learned counsel for the petitioner towards the policy/norms framed on Transfer of Mainstream/Specialized Officer in Scale-I, II and III of the Bank. Sri Shireesh Kumar has referred Para-1.2 of the aforesaid policy, which reads as under:

“1.2 In respect of transfers/posting of physically challenged officers, with benchmark disability and Officer who is caregiver of dependent daughter/son/parents/ spouse/brother/sister with ‘Specified Disability’ as certified by the certifying authority, as a Person with Benchmark Disability, as defined under Section 2(r) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, in terms of DOPT guidelines O.M. No. 42011/3/2014-Estt (Res) dated 8th October, 2018, bank shall follow the guidelines issued by Govt. of India from time to time, subject to administrative constraint.”

6. Since one memorandum of DOPT dated 08.10.2018 has been referred in the aforesaid guideline of the Bank so Sri Kumar has demonstrated such office memorandum being issued by the DOPT dated 08.10.2018 which has been annexed as Annexure No. 5 to the writ petition. He has drawn attention of this Court towards Para-3 (i) and (iii) of the aforesaid office memorandum of DOPT dated 08.10.2018, which read as under:

“(i) A Government employee who is a care-giver of dependent daughter/son/parents/ spouse/brother/sister with Specified Disability, as certified by the certifying authority as a Person with Benchmark Disability as defined under Section 2(r) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 may be exempted from the routine exercise of transfer/rotational transfer subject to the administrative constraints.

(iii) The term ‘Specified Disability’ as defined herein is applicable as grounds only for the purpose of seeking exemption from routine transfers/rotational transfer by the Government employee, who is a care-giver of dependent daughter/son/parents/spouse/brother/sister as stated in Para-3 (i) above.”

7. Sri Shireesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that so as to understand the meaning of ‘care-giver’ and ‘benchmark disability’ and ‘permanent disability’ the relevant provision of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (here-in-after referred to as the “Act 2016”) may be perused. Section 2(d) of the Act, 2016 defines ‘care-giver’ Section 2(r) defines ‘benchmark disability’ and Section 2(s) defines ‘person with disability’ for convenience, Section 2(d), (r) and (s) are being reproduced herein-below:

“2(d) “care-giver” means any person including parents and other family Members who with or without payment provides care, support or assistance to a person with disability.

(r) “person with benchmark disability” means a person with not less than forty per cent of a specified disability where specified disability has not been defined in measurable te