IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.51280 OF 2019 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN:
G V ANAND S/O.S.N.VENKATACHALAPATHI AGEDA BOUT 47 YEARS R/AT ‘B’ BLOCK COTTONPET GUDDIBANDE TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT ... PETITIONER (BY SRI M.C.BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BMTC CENTRAL OFFICES K H ROAD SHANTHI NAGAR BANGALORE-560 027 2. THE DIRECTOR (SECURITY AND VIGILANCE) BMTC CENTAL OFFICES K H ROAD SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027 3. THE CHIEF ESTABLISHMENT MANAGER BMTC CENTAL OFFICES K H ROAD SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.H.R.RENUKA, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ACCOMMODATE THE PETITIONER ANY OTHER ALTERNATIVE SUITABLE POST (LIGHT WORK) PERMANENTLY IN THE RESPONDNETS CORPORATION IN TERMS OF SECTION 47 OF THE PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES PROTECTION OF RIGHTS AND FULL PARTICIPATION ACT 1995, WITH PAY PROTECTION BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 23.10.2018 MADE BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE – H TO THE W.P.UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O THE CASE.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The short grievance of the petitioner is against non- consideration of his representation dated 23.10.2018, a copy whereof is at Annexure – H; the said representation is founded on some medical disability which arguably justifies complete rest for a certain period.
2. On request, the learned senior panel counsel- Smt.H.R.Renuka, having accepted notice for the respondents submits that there would not be much difficulty for considering the said representation, if the petitioner co- operates by producing the necessary documents in support of the relief sought therein and a reasonable period is prescribed by this Court for doing the said exercise. The stand of the respondents is fair and reasonable.
In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed off, directing respondent No.3 to consider the subject representation within a period of two weeks. Non- consideration within time is likely to be viewed seriously by the contempt of Court, if and when violation of this mandate is complained.
KTY Sd/- JUDGE