High Court Cases after 2015

Date of Judgement Parties Name   Judges Name Dictum
30-06-2015 U.Rajan Vs. Tamilnadu State Electricity Board Mr.Justice.S.M.Subramanian of Madras High Court Disabled persons cannot be transferred to another place, where there is no transport facility.
11.01.2018 C.Edwin Joshua Vs. Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Mr.Justice.G.R.Swaminathan of Madras High Court When the disabled person gave for alternative light work and his employment has to be taken as continuing one. His service cannot be taken from alternative posts as new service period
1.11.2017 National Federation of Blind Vs. State of U.P Mr. Justice Dr DevendraKumar Arora and Mr. Justice RavindraNath Mishra-Ii of Allahabad High Court Writ of mandamus filed for the relief under Section-33 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, three percent reservation in favour of person with disabilities distributed equally among persons suffering from blindness and low vision, hearing impaired and locomotor disability to the extent of one percent each is mandatory in all modes of recruitment including promotion for all groups of posts and consequently direct the respondents to give such reservation in promotion also to petitioner and other blind employees in the state and fill up the entire backlog of vacancies filled up by promotion beginning from 1996
05.07.2017 ShibuSarkar Vs. State of West Bengal Mr Justice SubrataTalukdar of Calcutta High Court DUnder the provisions of the PWD, 1995 Ac), the noted vacancies must be reserved at one per cent each for the three categories of PWD and total reservation provided In the PWD Ac is 3 %. The categories in the following sequence of reservation, are:- (a) blindness and low vision, (b) hearing impairment; and (c) loco motor disability or cerebral palsyictum
16.03.2017 Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Sunil Kumar Mr.Justice.SanjivKhanna, and Mr.Justice.ChanderShakhar of Delhi High Court Disability Act is applicable to the every employee irrespective of the Nature of Employee and Nature of Appointment.
08.11.2016 Palani Vs Tamil State Transport Corporation Mr.Justice.R.Subbiah of Madras High Court Writ of Mandamus to give alternate light works in view of Disability occurred to the petitioner and directions are issued to the respondent
21.9.2016 Union of India Vs. Sathish Kumar Ranjan Mr.Justice.S.Manikumar and Mr.Justice.Athinanthan 1. Interpretation of S.K.M. Haider Vs. Union of India and Others, reported in 2011 (4) SCC 700, with regard to the disability relating Vision of the employee for their working groups. 2. Whether the classification of the employee with regard to the vision of eye in the railway department is vaild 3. judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.K.M.Haider's case (cited supra), as regards, classification for the purpose of satisfying vision tests, under Category B-2, applicable to the the post of Ticket Collector, is aplicable to all similarly placed persons. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.K.M.Haider's case (cited supra), there is no rational basis, in relation to the objects, set out in Para 510 of IRMM, in categorizing the post of Ticket Collectors, under Class B-2, in Annexure IV. When the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.K.M.Haider's case (cited supra), has categorically held that it is for the Government to have a fresh look, insofar as the categorisation of posts, pertaining to non-Gazetted Railway services, in Annexure IV and further held that the post of Ticket Collectors, cannot be held to be covered by Class B-2,
07.04.2016 C.Kathiravan Vs. District Collector and another Mr.Justice.S.Manikumar and Mr.Justice. C.T.Selvam Of Madras High Court Directions to issue National Identity card for disabled persons in all over India
30.03.2016 U.P.Higher Education Service Vs. Chief Commissioner for persons with disability Mr.Justice.SudhirAgarwal And Mr.Justice.ShamSherBahadur Singh of Allahabad High Court Order passed by the Chief Commissioner in view of the Section 50 and 59 of the Act. But, the said order failed to comply with the Provisions of 59(b) of the Disability act. hence, the directions issued by the Chief Commissioner is set aside.
04.01.2016 Duraisamy Vs. State Of Tamilnadu Mr.Justice.D.Hariparathaman of Madras High Court The petitioner was terminated from service in view of disability occurred during the works and termination order issued against the petitioner. The termination order was set asided by the Hon’ble Court.
20.08.2015 Rajasthan Public Service Commission Vs. HunnyChugh Mr.Justice.Alok Sharma of Rajasthan High Court The main question in the above case is “ Whether a medical Certificate of Disability issued by a medical Officer of the Union Territory of Delhi is valid to avail the quota reserved for persons with Disability is service of the State of Rajasthan .”
21.07.2015 HetaDharmangBaxi Vs. Union of India Mr.Justice.K.M.Thakur of Gujarat High Court Whether the “ Juvenile disability” is included in the definition of disability or special disability under Special Disability Act.
15.05.2016 Deepshika Vs. Medical Council of India Ms.Chief Justice G.Rohini and Mr.Justice. Rajiv SahaiEndlaw of Delhi High Court Medical council issued notification for admission in Medical College. The said Notification was challenged on the ground of admission at 3 % for candidates shall be reserved only for persons with locomotor disability of lower limbs are ultra Vires the Provisions of Disability Act, 1995
23.03.2015 Guru Gobind Singh Indra Prasad Vs. Shri Kamal Agarwal Mr.Justice.Valmiki.Mehta Chief Commissioner under the Act does not have any power to issue Injunction and any other restraint orders
09.03.2015 Anjeel Kumar Vs. State of J & K Mr.Justice.N.PaulVasanthakumar, Chief Justice and Mr.Justice.Dhiraj Singh Thakur of Jammu and Kashmir High Court Every notification for appointment of any posts has to be notified after identification of post of disabled persons. If, the notification was issued without demarcation of identification of posts the disabled persons and notification is in violation of Protection of Disabled Acts.
09.02.2015 Sivadasan Vs. State of Kerala Mr.Justice. P.R.RamachandraMenon and Mr.Justice.Babu Mathew P.Joseph of Kerala High Court Whether the reservation envisaged in Section 3 read with reference to posts identified under Section 32 of the Act is applicable to appointment to the extent of promotion