The court established that individuals with disabilities are entitled to suitable alternative employment under the Persons with Disabilities Act, emphasizing the importance of accommodations based on medical evaluations.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed for a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to suitable alternative employment (light duty ) in the Corporation and for a direction to the respondents to restore the light duty allowed to the petitioner permanently from which he is kept out as per Ext.P6 memo. Petitioner is a driver of the lst respondent-Corporation working at Thiruvalla depot. The case of the petitioner is that while in service during 2008 he suffered severe Psoriatic Arthropathy with limitation of movements for which he underwent treatment at various hospitals. Ext.P1 is the copy of the treatment certificate issued by the Muthoot Medical Centre. Ext.P2 is a copy of the medical prescriptions issued by Dr. Sherly Devanni of the Government Ayurveda Hospital, Changanacherry. Ext.P3 is also the medical prescription issued by Dr. P.T. Pillai of the Azeezia Medical College. Petitioner submits W.P.(C).No.18347/2011 that because of his illness and the limitation of movements of his right shoulder he is unable to drive vehicles. Petitioner produced Ext.P4 medical certificate dated 15/2/2009 advising the petitioner to avoid heavy works and the works involving repetitive movements of his right shoulder. It is submitted that on the basis of Ext.P4, he was allowed light duty temporarily as directed by the Corporation and he was asked to produce disability certificate of the District Medical Board for continuing the light duty arrangement. Petitioner produced Ext.P5disability certificate issued by the District Medical Board. It is submitted that on the basis of Ext.P5 disability certificate the Corporation allowed light duty to the petitioner and posted him in the store section. Subsequently, by Ext.P6 memo he was relieved of his duties in the store section. The case advanced before this Court is that the petitioner has been suffering from Psoriatic Arthropathy with limitation of movements of right shoulder and therefore he is permanently incapable to drive vehicles.

W.P.(C).No.18347/2011

2. In the statement filed by the respondent it is contended that the petitioner is not entitled to alternative employment and his case does not come under the purview of Section 2(f) of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Right and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The Standing Counsel for the respondents pointed out that the petitioner has been sanctioned maximum period of light duty. Paragraph 5 of the statement reads as follows:

“It may kindly be noted that the Corporation has recently formulated a scheme to allow category change to its medically unfit employees from their original category to suitable lower category. If he opts of category change his present pay will be protected. The other option left for the petitioner is to apply for invalid pension. If the petitioner submits application opting any of the above choice it will be considered as per rules.”

3. Standing Counsel for the Corporation submits that the petitioner can be accommodated for shunting duty. Standing Counsel also submits that for the time being the light duty arrangement will be allowed to continue for a period of one month W.P.(C).No.18347/2011 and thereafter the matter will be considered on merits.

In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Corporation to issue appropriate orders restoring light duty to the petitioner.