IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI WRIT PETITION NO.25167/2018 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN:
M. P. RENUKA W/O LATE T.M. NARASIMHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO.136, ‘LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA SAMY NILAYA’, KOTTANA HALLI NEW EXTENTION, MALLASANDRA RAILWAY STATION, MALLASANDRA-572 107 TUMKUR TALUK AND DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI M.C.BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, CENTRAL OFFICES, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027.
2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC, TUMKUR DIVISION, TUMKUR-572 101. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. H.R.RENUKA, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO ACCOMMODATE ANY OTHER ALTERNATIVE SUITABLE POST (LIGHT WORK) PERMANENTLY TO THE PETITIONER IN THE RESPONDENTS 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 REPRESENTATIONS DATED 22.02.2018 AND 05.06.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-H & M TO THIS WRIT PETITION UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:
i) Issue a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to accommodate any other alternative suitable post (light work) permanently to the petitioner in the respondents 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 representations dated 22.02.2018 and 05.06.2018 vide Annexure H & M to this writ petition under the facts and circumstances of the case and ii) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents on instructions, submitted that the necessary endorsement has been issued to the petitioner in respect of assigning the light work due to the difficulties faced by the petitioner relating to physical disability.
3. In view of these facts and circumstances, petition do not survive for consideration. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner in the event, if the endorsement is adverse to him, he is permitted to challenge.
Sd/- JUDGE HA/-