Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.Kumarappan, J
S.K.Mohan – Appellant
Versus
M/s.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Villupuram Ltd. – Respondent
W.P.No.22945 of 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition for mandamus regarding employment rights. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. argument on denial of work pending medical evaluation. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's finding on statutory violation and necessity for employment. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court orders resumption of duty with conditions. (Para 6) |
| 5. final ruling on writ petition disposition. (Para 7) |
O R D E R
The instant writ petition has been filed with a prayer for issuing a mandamus to direct the respondent herein to offer an alternate job as per Section 20 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) by considering the representation of the petitioner herein dated 29.04.2025.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he was appointed as a Conductor in the respondent Corporation on 06.10.2010. During 2019, he was admitted to the Rajiv Gandhi Hospital due to a cerebral problem in the brain. Thereafter, he was provided with alternate duty. However, from 21.04.2025, he was not permitted to work, which is in contravention of Section 20 of the Act. Hence, he has sent a representation dated 29.04.2025 for permitting him to work in the respondent Corporation.
3. At this juncture, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that after the petitioner suffered a cerebral problem in the brain, he was allowed to work on light duty. However, taking into consideration his functionality, he was directed to get a report from the Medical Board, and such report is yet to be received.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made on either side.
5. It is not in serious dispute that the petitioner was working in the respondent Corporation until 21.04.2025. But due to the fact that, he has been referred to the Medical Board, directed not to report for duty, untill the receipt of the Medical Board report. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that such denial of work, awaiting the Medical Board report, is in contravention of the mandate of Section 20 of the Act.
6. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to resume his duty forthwith. However, the respondent is at liberty to take a decision on the future continuance of the petitioner based on the Medical Board report.
7. In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the above observations. No costs.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
