Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 11743
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
P.J. KESHAVARAO, J
T. Srinivasulu – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Writ Petition No: 13622 of 2025 | I.A No: 1 of 2025 | I.A No: 2 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri S. Parineeta
For the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES II, Sri A. Rama Rao
Employment rights for medically unfit personnel are to be observed under the RPWD Act, ensuring timely consideration of alternative employment requests.
Headnote:(A) Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Compulsory retirement on medical grounds - Claim for alternative employment under RPWD Act not considered by the respondents - Direction to respondents to decide applicability of benefits under the Act within four weeks - Petitioner declared medically unfit but request for alternative employment neglected due to bureaucratic delays. (Para 1-3)
(B) Employment Rights - The court examined the obligations of the transport department to provide alternative employment to medically unfit employees as per the provisions of the RPWD Act - The inaction of the respondents deemed arbitrary and violative of statutory duties. (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was declared medically unfit for the role of conductor and compelled to retire, seeking alternative employment as per the RPWD Act, which was not granted due to pending government exemptions.
Findings of Court:
The High Court directed the transport department to make a decision regarding the extension of alternative employment benefits within a stipulated time frame.
Issues: The main issue addressed was the failure of respondents to consider the petitioner's case for alternative employment despite the provisions of the RPWD Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court highlighted the importance of statutory obligations under the RPWD Act and mandated a timely response to the petitioner's requests.
Result: The High Court directed the respondents to take action in line with the provisions of the RPWD Act, within four weeks.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks alternative employment under the rpwd act. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments highlight violation of petitioner’s rights. (Para 2) |
| 3. court observes state's inaction regarding employment benefits. (Para 3) |
| 4. court directs decision within a specified timeframe. (Para 4) |
Petitioner/s AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Transport Department, Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi Amaravati.
2. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep by its Managing Director, G J 58 + M32 Arrival BIock, Pandit Nehru Bus Stop, Krishna Lanka, Vijayawada, NTR District 520 013.
3. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep by its District Public Transport Officer, Tirupa{i Regional, Tirupati, Chittoor District.
4. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Punganur, Chittoor District, Rep by its Depot Manager, Punganur Depot.
Respondent/s i I- +
Petition under Article 226 df the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring in action on the part of the respondents in considering petitioner case for an alternative employment with all oth6r' benefits on declaring petitioner compulsory retirement on medical grounds`tto the post of conductor in-A2 category by taking further action in -pursuance of the letter in No.P2/754(15/2024-PO.lll), dated 29-07-2024 issued by respondent No.2 as arbitrary, illegal abduction of statutory duty cast upon them, voilative of the Provisions of Rights of the Persons and Disabilities Act, 2016, apart from being voilative of fundamental rights guaranteed to 'petitioner under Articles 14,19, and 21 of the Constitution of the India and consequently direct the respondents to consider petitioner case for an alternative employment with all their benefits on declaring petitioner compulsory retirement on medical~'grounds to the post of conductor in A2 category by taking further action in pursuance of the letter in No.P2/754(15/2024-PO.IIl), dated 29-07-2024 issued by respondent No.2.
IANO: 1 OF2025 Petition under Section 15 1 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents in considering petitioner case for ant alternative employment with all other benefits on declaring petitioner compulsory retirement on medical grounds to the post of conductor in A2 category by taking further ;ction in pursuance of the letter in No.P2/754(15/2024-PO.Ill), dated 29-07-2024 issued by respondent No.2, Pending disposal df WP 13622 of 2025, on the file of the High Court.
IANO: 2OF2025 Petition under Section' 15'1 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to d-lrect th6 respon`dents {o consider the petitioner Representation, dated 15-04-2025, and take immediate necessary action on the same, pending disposal of WP 13622 of 2025, on the file of the High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri S PARINEETA Advocate for the Petitioner, GP FOR SERVICES Il for the Respondent No.1; Sri A. Rama Rao, Standing Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 and the Court made the following.
ORDER:
£fLearned Government PIeader for Services-ll takes notice for respondent No.1.
sri A. Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for respondent Mos.2 to 4, The Ex-Officio Vice Chairman & Managing Director of the 2nd respondent addressed a letter dated 29.07.2024 to the Commissioner, Persons with Disabilities under. RIghts of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, (hereinafter referred as fRPWD Act, 2016') informing the scheme of providing all:ernative employment to medically unfit employees,
