Saturday, April 22, 2017

Ranvir Singh Chauhan Vs. Secretary DH&FW | Case No. 4/628/2014-Wel./CD/78-79 | Dated: 21.04.2017






  In the Court of Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
National Capital Territory of Delhi
25- D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2
Phone-011-23216002-04, Telefax: 011-23216005, Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the Persons with Disabilities
(Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995]
     
Case No. 4/628/2014-Wel./CD/78-79                                                  Dated: 21.04.2017

In the matter of :  
             
Sh. Ranvir Singh Chauhan
Flat No. -2 Nursing Hostel
Jag Parvesh Chander Hospital                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ………Complainant            
                        Versus
The Secretary                                                          
Department of Health & Family Welfare
9th Level, Delhi Secretariat,
I.P. Estate New Delhi 02.                                                 ………...…Respondent


Date of Hearing : 10.04.2017                                            

Present :               Sh. Ashok Kumar Verma,  Dy. Secretary  For respondent,                                                  Health and Family Welfare.
                              Sh. Ranvir Singh Chauhan, Complainant
                                                                                               

                                                                ORDER

                  This Court in para 5 of its order dated 23.03.2015 inter-alia observed  that the Department of Health & Family Welfare could not produce  any order/Notification of Govt. of NCT of Delhi relating to conversion of the post of  Staff Nurse and Nursing Sister to Group B. There is a provision of maintaining a one hundred point reservation roster for promotion which reportedly is not being maintained by the concerned department.  Therefore the rule of three percent reservation in promotion to the persons with disabilities is also not being followed in the Department.  The Respondent was therefore directed  to maintain 100 points roster for promotion in Group C since 1996, compute the backlog vacancies and then fill them up through special DPC in a time bound manner . The Respondent was also directed to file Action Taken Report by Ist July, 2015.

2.               As the Action Taken Report was not filed by the respondent department, the complainant submitted a representation which was taken up with the respondent vide communication dated 5.11.2015. Thereafter a number of correspondences have been exchanged besides holding personal hearings.

3.               During the hearing on 11.04.2017,  the representative of the respondent submitted a copy of letter No.F.8/288/H&FW/Nursing/2016/461 dated 10.04.2017  Annexure ‘A’  to the said letter inter-alia states as under:
                  “Three percent of the vacancies in case of promotion to Group D and Group C posts in which the element of direct recruitment, if any, does not exceed 75%, shall be reserved for persons with disabilities of which one per cent each shall be reserved for persons suffering from (i) blindness or low vision, (ii) hearing impairment and (iii) loco motor disability or cerebral palsy in the posts identified for each disability.
                  As regards the clarification related to Group of the posts, it is submitted that Recruitment Rules are notified under proviso to Article 309 or any specific statutes for post(s) prescribing inter-alia the method of recruitment and eligibility for such recruitment. Recruitment Rules are subordinate legislation and so, they are statutory in nature. Therefore, the changes brought out by any relevant instructions have to be incorporated in the Recruitment Rules/Service Rules by suitable amendments from time to time (P-296/C). Further, Administrative Department vide para 270n/f has clarified as Class-III,  Non-gazetted, Non-Ministerial, which is equivalent to Group-C and relevant provision for quantum of reservation is mentioned at point No.2 (ii) on page-63/N.
                  In view of the above the file may be returned to Administrative Department with the advice to take appropriate action as per the guidelines issued by DoPT,  GoI vide O.M. dated 29.12.2005.”

4.               The complainant submitted that despite order dated 23.03.2015 of this court, he has not been promoted to the post of Nursing Sister.

5.               It is observed that the operation of the order dated 23.03.2015 of this court has  not been stayed and has remained unactioned for more than two years. The Respondent has also not produced any additional facts and the order dated 23.03.2015 stands.  It is also observed that the letter dated 10.04.2017of the respondent indicates that  as per the opinion of the Services Department, the post of Nursing Sister, the post to which the complainant has sought promotion against a reserved vacancy for persons with disabilities, is classified as class III  Non-gazetted, Non-Ministerial post i.e Group C  and  DOP&T’s OM dated 29th December, 2005 provides for reservation of vacancies for persons with disabilities in promotion to Group C posts.

6.               It may also be pertinent to invite the attention of the respondent that Hon’ble High Court of M.P Bench at Indore  vide order dated 12.01.2015( copy enclosed) in W.P (S) no.439/2004-Chandra Shekhar Sharma Versus Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd & Anr held inter-alia as under :
                  “In my opinion, when any judicial order is passed by any authority empowered to pass and judicial order any law then it is legal obligation of the party against whom such order is passed to see that such an order is implemented in accordance with the directions contained therein. No efforts should be made to avoid its implementation. It is only when such an order is set aside by the higher courts such as appellate court, revisionary court or writ court, as the case may be then the question of its implementation does not arise. In all other cases so long as an order validly passed in exercise of judicial power conferred by some Act and is holding the field, It must be implemented by the parties without any delay.”

7.               In light of the facts and circumstances of this case, the respondent is advised to implement the order dated 23.03.2015 without any further loss of time and ensure that the rights and entitlements due to the complainant are not denied by delaying the process when the rules, instructions etc. on the subject are very clear.   

                  The matter is disposed of accordingly.

                  Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 21st  day of April, 2017.     

     
                                                                                           (T.D. Dhariyal )
                                                            Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities






No comments:

Post a Comment