Under Section 20(4) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, an employer cannot terminate or reduce the rank of an employee who acquires a disability during service, and such employees are entitled to alternative employment and associated benefits.

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to continue the petitioners service with suitable alternative light duty till the date of his superannuation on 31.07.2027 without any interruption as per Section 20(4) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 taking note of his disability factor.

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner’s service with suitable alternative light duty till the date of his superannuation on 31.07.2027 without any interruption as per Section 20(4) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 taking note of his disability factor.

When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the very same issue involved in this writ petition has been dealt by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in writ appeal in W.A.No.3766 of 2025 dated 07.01.2026, wherein, it is observed as follows:

“5. The said writ petition having been considered was allowed by the writ Court by passing the following order:

“5. Considering the above said facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the proceedings of the Special Board, Rajiv Gandhi Government Hospital, Chennai dated 05.04.2024 indicating that the petitioner has suffered 60% disability, the authorities are directed to sanction the eligible position, whatever the petitioner is entitled to. Further, the salary shall be paid to the petitioner for the pending months without any further delay, if not already paid. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.”

As against which only, the present intra-Court appeal has been directed.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that based on the direction given by the writ Court, already a proceeding has been given by the first appellant on 19.02.2025 directing the second appellant to give him alternative job and thereafter, whether the second appellant had given the alternative job or not is not known as of now, therefore, he wants to get instructions in this regard.

7. It is an appeal filed by the appellants, i.e., first and second appellants jointly. The first appellant issued proceedings on 19.02.2025 to the second appellant to give alternative job to the respondent / writ petitioner but the second appellant whether has complied with the order by giving alternative employment to the respondent / writ petitioner, if it is not known, this appeal itself is liable to be dismissed on that ground itself.

8. That apart, as per the provisions of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 especially under Section 20(4), no Establishment shall dispense with or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during his or her service. If that being so, dispensing with the service of the respondent / writ petitioner by making oral termination and subsequently delay in giving the alternative employment are all against the provisions of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, therefore, the respondent / writ petitioner since is entitled to get alternative job and if gets the alternative job, he is also entitled to get the salary and other perquisites, the same cannot be denied by the employer under the provisions of the Act and the relief sought for granted through the impugned order cannot be found fault with

9. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to entertain this writ appeal, as a result of which, this Writ Appeal is liable to be dismissed, hence it is dismissed. The orders passed by the writ Court shall be complied with by the appellants within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, it is open to the respondent / writ petitioner to take any coercive steps for not complying the order of the writ Court. However, there shall be no order as to cost