Sensitise government officials on rights of persons with disabilities, orders Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has expressed surprise over the Puducherry government having denied the job of Junior Engineer (Electrical) to a person with hereditary sensorimotor neuropathy, though he had obtained a B.Tech. degree in electrical and electronics engineering after clearing practical examinations and had also served as an electrical supervisor in a private company for four years.

In a judgment delivered on the day of his retirement, former Chief Justice of the High Court, Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, and Justice G. Arul Murugan directed the Puducherry Chief Secretary to formulate a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) within two months, directing all government departments and public officials dealing with persons with disabilities to hold sensitisation programmes periodically.

“India is party to international conventions. If we claim to be a progressive society in the 21^st century, the age-old practice of monotonous automation needs to be zealously eschewed and has to be substituted by a proactive and positive obligated attitude of all public functionaries and authorities in dealing with persons with disabilities, more particularly, while dealing with the cases of persons with disabilities, as to whether they are medically fit to undertake a job/employment,” the Bench wrote.

Assistive devices

It went on to state: “Their disability element is required to be judged with the assistive tools and devices, if any, available for such kind of disabilities. As an illustration, a person with high disability, which otherwise would make him medically unfit, may lower down the degree of disability with the help of assistive device. This kind of affirmative action as part of positive obligation and proactive attitude that required sensitivity is what is least expected, and quite legitimately, by persons with disabilities in our society, who are none other than our own brothers and sisters. Indeed, their rights are our obligations.”

The Bench agreed with senior counsel R. Vaigai, representing the writ petitioner E. Hariharan, that the medical board had not properly assessed the ability of her client to perform the services of a Junior Engineer (Electrical). It directed Puducherry Additional Government Pleader V. Vasanthakumar to ensure the constitution of a medical board afresh by including an officer well versed with the nature of work of a junior engineer.

Taking note that the petitioner had secured high marks of 65% in the written test conducted for the post, the judges said, he would be entitled to appointment immediately after being cleared by the new medical board. They also directed the government to pay costs of ₹50,000 to the petitioner.

Authoring the verdict, the former Chief Justice also wrote: “The right to access to justice and right to equality and equal treatment claimed by a person with disability are ingrained in the basic human rights, in addition to it being recognised under the Constitution and given effect to by the law makers by enacting the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. However, those principles enshrined in texts, at times, find difficult to be operated on ground realities majorly because of attitudinal behaviour and approach which lacks sensitivity, in utter disregard to right to equality.”