1994 (2) TMI 270 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether the appellant can discharge the duties of Sub-Station Attendant or any other equivalent post carrying the pay scale of Rs 1400-2300? Held that - When an employee is afflicted with unfortunate disease due to which when he is unable to perform the duties of the posts he was holding the employer must make every endeavour to adjust him in a post in which the employee would be suitable to discharge the duties. Asking the appellant to discharge the duties as a Carrier Attendant is unjust. Since he is a matriculate he is eligible for the post of LDC. For LDC apart from matriculation passing in typing test either in Hindi or English at the speed of 15/30 words per minute is necessary. For a Clerk typing generally is not a must.Thus the respondent Board directed to relax his passing of typing test and to appoint him as an LDC protecting his scale of pay of Rs 1400-2300 and direct to pay all the arrears of salary.

Issues:
1. Appellant's ability to perform duties as a Sub-Station Attendant or equivalent post.
2. Allegations against the Medical Board.
3. Appellant's eligibility for clerical or non-technical post.
4. Appropriate post for the appellant based on qualifications and educational requirements.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Appellant's ability to perform duties as a Sub-Station Attendant or equivalent post
The appellant, a Sub-Station Attendant who underwent an amputation of his right arm due to cancer, was examined by a three-member Medical Board. The Board, assisted by Engineers, found that the appellant was unable to effectively handle equipment and operate installations essential for the role of a Sub-Station Attendant. The Medical Board concluded that due to safety concerns, the appellant was unfit to perform the duties of a Sub-Station Attendant or any equivalent post, as the tasks were deemed risky for both the installations and the appellant himself.

Issue 2: Allegations against the Medical Board
The appellant raised objections regarding the examination process, alleging that he was not adequately prepared to handle 66 KV installations and that his advocate was not allowed during the examination. However, the Court dismissed these allegations, emphasizing the impartiality of the Medical Board. The Court highlighted that the Medical Board, following the Court's directions, evaluated the appellant's capabilities sympathetically. Therefore, the Court did not entertain the appellant's unwarranted allegations against the Medical Board.

Issue 3: Appellant's eligibility for clerical or non-technical post
Considering the appellant's qualifications and capabilities, the Medical Board recommended the appellant for a clerical or non-technical post, given his ability to write with his left hand. The Court acknowledged the appellant's eligibility for a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) position, which required matriculation and typing skills. The Court directed the respondent Board to appoint the appellant as an LDC, relaxing the typing test requirement, and protecting his last drawn pay scale of Rs 1400-2300.

Issue 4: Appropriate post for the appellant based on qualifications and educational requirements
The Court recognized the appellant's limitations in meeting the educational qualifications for certain posts, such as Upper Division Clerk (UDC), which required graduation or post-graduation qualifications. As the appellant was only a matriculate, the Court could not direct his appointment as a UDC. Instead, based on his qualifications, the Court directed the respondent Board to appoint him as an LDC, ensuring the protection of his pay scale and payment of arrears.

In conclusion, the Court allowed the appeal, directing the respondent Board to appoint the appellant as an LDC, considering his qualifications and the protection of his pay scale, without awarding any costs.

← Previous Next →