2004 (8) TMI 724 - SC - Indian Laws

Promotion Upheld for Visually Impaired Employee; Appeal Dismissed Citing Disability Act's Non-Discrimination Clause.

The appeal was dismissed by the SC, affirming the decisions of the CAT and the Delhi HC, which upheld the promotion of an employee from Group-C to Group-B ... Challenged the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court dismissing the Writ Petition filed by the Union of India, affirming the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) regarding promotion of an employee from Group-C to Group-B post based on medical fitness - HELD THAT:- The notification can be issued when the appropriate Government, having regard to the type of work carried on in any establishment thinks it appropriate to exempt such establishment from the provisions of Section 47. The proviso to sub-Section (2) thereof does not operate in the absence of the notification. A proviso to a section cannot be used to import into the enacting part something which is not there, but where the enacting part is susceptible to several possible meanings it may be controlled by the proviso. Though several documents were referred to contend that the intention of the employer was to exclude certain establishments, a bare perusal thereof shows that they have no relevance and do not in any way fulfill the requirements of the proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 47. It goes without saying that if a notification in this regard is issued by the appropriate Government the same shall be operative in respect of the establishment which is specifically exempted. That is not the position so far as the present case is concerned. Therefore, the order of the Tribunal as affirmed by the High Court by the impugned judgment suffers from no infirmity to warrant our interference. The appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. Issues Involved:The legality of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court dismissing the Writ Petition filed by the Union of India, affirming the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) regarding promotion of an employee from Group-C to Group-B post based on medical fitness.Judgment Details:The respondent, while working in Group-C post of the Railways, applied for promotion to Group-B post but was found medically unfit due to visual handicap. The CAT allowed the respondent's application, citing provisions of The Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, which prohibits discrimination in promotion based on physical disability. The High Court upheld CAT's decision, considering Section 47(2) of the Act.In the appeal, it was argued that the proviso to Section 47(2) allows the appropriate Government to exempt establishments from the Act's provisions based on the nature of work. However, the respondent contended that both CAT and the High Court's judgments were correct.Section 47 of the Act prohibits discrimination in government employments and states that no promotion shall be denied based on disability. The proviso to Section 47(2) allows the Government to exempt establishments through notification, but this does not apply in the absence of such notification.The function of a proviso is to qualify or create an exception to the main provision, and it does not extend beyond the enactment it is attached to. The proviso to Section 47(2) cannot be used to import conditions not present in the main provision.The appeal was dismissed as the employer's intention to exclude certain establishments was not supported by relevant documents fulfilling the proviso's requirements. Without a notification from the appropriate Government, the Tribunal and High Court's decisions were upheld as legally sound.Overall, the appeal failed, and no costs were awarded in the case.