thank you. i am not confused. the problem is that this judgment is made by delhi high court. is it applicable above its own terriotory or it is only a citation to support one's application. regards drun
On 12/24/07, Harshvardhan Singh Negi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > first go to delhi highcourt site www.delhihighcourt.nic.in > then select judge Mr A.K sikri then from month and date to again date and > month You can find the judgement their any problem let me know. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Amiyo Biswas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 2:26 PM > Subject: Re: [AI] A land mark judgement of reservation of VH in promotion > > > > In that case please send me the URL. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Amiyo. > > > > Cell: +91-9433464329 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Harshvardhan Singh Negi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 1:21 PM > > Subject: Re: [AI] A land mark judgement of reservation of VH in promotion > > > > > >> Hey folks, > >> You can get soft copy from Delhi highcourt website I don't have any Idia > > of > >> hard copy. > >> Thanks in advance > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Amiyo Biswas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 12:13 PM > >> Subject: Re: [AI] A land mark judgement of reservation of VH in promotion > >> > >> > >> > Hello, > >> > > >> > I need a hard copy or the web site of the judgement for my own benefit. > >> > How > >> > can I obtain it? > >> > > >> > > >> > Best regards, > >> > > >> > Amiyo. > >> > > >> > Cell: +91-9433464329 > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: "Harshvardhan Singh Negi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > To: <[email protected]> > >> > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 11:47 AM > >> > Subject: [AI] A land mark judgement of reservation of VH in promotion > >> > > >> > > >> >> Kindly find the judgement of Delhi highcourt regarding Reservation in > >> > promotion of VH > >> >> > >> >> IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> WP (C) Nos. 11818 and 13627-28/2004 > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 07.12.2007 > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Pronounced on : December 07, 2007 > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> # Union of India thru G.M. Northern Railway .....Petitioner in > >> >> > >> >> WP(C) No. > >> >> > >> >> 11818/2004 > >> >> > >> >> Chairman, Railway Board ....Petitioner in WP(C) No. > >> >> > >> >> 13627-28/2004 > >> >> > >> >> ! through : Mr. > >> >> > >> >> V.S.R. Krishna with > >> >> > >> >> Mr. B.S. Rajesh Agrajit > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> VERSUS > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> $ Jagmohan Singh .....Respondent in > >> >> > >> >> WP(C) No. > >> >> > >> >> 11818/2004 > >> >> > >> >> Northern Railway Physically Handicapped > >> >> > >> >> Employees Welfare Association and Ors. > >> >> > >> >> ......Respondent in WP(C) No. > >> >> > >> >> 13627-28/2004 > >> >> > >> >> ! through : Dr. Harish > >> >> > >> >> Uppal for the > >> >> > >> >> respondent in WP(C) > >> >> > >> >> No.11818/2004 > >> >> > >> >> Mr.A.K. Behera for the > >> >> > >> >> respondent in WP(C) No. > >> >> > >> >> 13627-28/2004 > >> >> > >> >> CORAM :- > >> >> > >> >> THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI > >> >> > >> >> THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the > > Judgment? > >> >> > >> >> 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? > >> >> > >> >> 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> A.K. SIKRI, J. > >> >> > >> >> 1.The question that arises for consideration in these cases is as to > >> > whether 3% > >> >> > >> >> reservation under Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal > >> >> > >> >> Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 > >> >> > >> >> {hereinafter referred to as the 'Disability Act'} in the public > >> >> employment > >> >> > >> >> provided in favour of the physically handicapped persons would be > >> > available to > >> >> > >> >> them even for promotions as well. The Tribunal has, vide the impugned > >> > judgment, > >> >> > >> >> decided this question in the affirmative. Not satisfied with this > > opinion > >> > of > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> the Tribunal, in these writ petitions the said judgment was assailed > >> >> by > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> Government. It would be advisable to take note of the factual matrix > >> >> under > >> >> > >> >> which the aforesaid question arises for consideration from WP (C) No. > >> > 11818/04. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 2.The respondent herein is an orthopaedically handicapped person > >> >> having > >> > 55% > >> >> > >> >> disability. He was appointed as LDC in the Northern Railways on > >> >> 16.6.1972. > >> > He > >> >> > >> >> got promotions from time to time and has risen to the rank of Office > >> >> > >> >> Superintendent Grade-I (OS-I). Next promotion is to the post of Chief > >> > Office > >> >> > >> >> Superintendent (COS). Two posts of COS were created by the petitioner > > on > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> recommendations of the Fifth Central Pay Commission vide letter dated > >> > 10.5.1998. > >> >> > >> >> They are to be filled up as a one time relaxation following the > >> >> process > >> >> of > >> >> > >> >> modified selection as per the Railway Board's communication dated > >> >> February > >> > 1999. > >> >> > >> >> It is not in dispute that the existing instructions with regard to > >> > reservations > >> >> > >> >> of SC/ST have been observed to be continued in the new grades. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 3.Even before the Disability Act came into force in the year 1996, the > >> >> > >> >> Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training vide OM > >> >> dated > >> >> > >> >> 28.2.1986 had provided for reservations in jobs for physically > >> >> handicapped > >> >> > >> >> persons in Group C and D posts. The posts on which such reservation > >> >> was > >> >> to > >> > be > >> >> > >> >> applied were identified by the Railway Board on 10.7.1987. As many as > > 253 > >> > jobs > >> >> > >> >> in Group C and 17 in Group D were identified where physically > > handicapped > >> >> > >> >> persons could be appointed. The post in question, namely, Chief Office > >> >> > >> >> Superintendent is a Group C post. The Government of India, Ministry of > >> >> > >> >> Personnel issued a memorandum on 20.11.1989 providing reservation for > >> > physically > >> >> > >> >> handicapped in the posts filled by promotion. This has to be > > implemented > >> > by all > >> >> > >> >> Ministries and Departments. By Disability Act coming into force on > >> > 7.2.1996, a > >> >> > >> >> mandatory requirement of providing 3% reservation in appointments has > >> >> been > >> > made, > >> >> > >> >> which included handicap in vision, hearing and locomotion. However, > > this > >> > is > >> >> > >> >> with a rider that having regard to the type of work in any > > establishment, > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> appropriate Government by way of a notification exempt any department > > or > >> >> > >> >> establishment from reserving the posts for disabled persons. > >> >> Memorandum > >> > dated > >> >> > >> >> 16.1.1998 provides 100 point roster for reserved posts for physically > >> >> > >> >> handicapped and point No.1 is reserved for physically handicapped. OM > >> > dated > >> >> > >> >> 18.2.1997 issued by the Ministry of Personnel provides reservation as > > per > >> > roster > >> >> > >> >> to the physically handicapped persons in Group A and B posts and also > > OM > >> > dated > >> >> > >> >> 4.7.1997 providing roster points No. 1, 24, 67 in the cycle of 100 > >> > vacancies for > >> >> > >> >> 100 point roster to be reserved for physically handicapped persons. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 4.The respondent herein wanted that for appointment to the post of COS > >> >> > >> >> reservation for physically handicapped persons be also made in tune > > with > >> > such > >> >> > >> >> reservations having provided for SC/ST candidates. We may, however, > > note > >> > that > >> >> > >> >> prior to the enactment of the Disability Act, the Ministry of Railways > >> >> had > >> > taken > >> >> > >> >> a decision on 5.12.1995 that for the posts which are to be filled by > >> > promotion, > >> >> > >> >> reservations for physically handicapped persons would not be given > >> >> keeping > >> > in > >> >> > >> >> view the special nature of job and safe carriage of goods and > > passengers. > >> >> > >> >> However, after the Disability Act came into force, the respondent made > >> >> > >> >> representations, both individually as well as through his Association > >> >> i.e. > >> >> > >> >> Northern Railway Physically Handicapped Employees Welfare Association, > > to > >> >> > >> >> provide such reservation even when the posts are to be filled by > >> > promotion. > >> >> > >> >> These representations were not responded to by the Railway > >> >> Authorities. > >> > The > >> >> > >> >> respondent, thus, filed OA No. 3108/2002 which was disposed of with > >> >> the > >> >> > >> >> directions to consider the representation of the respondent in the > > light > >> > of OM > >> >> > >> >> dated 20.11.1989. The Department considered the representation and > > turned > >> > down > >> >> > >> >> the same vide its decision dated 26.4.2002 and 25.3.2003. As the > >> > authorities > >> >> > >> >> did not accede to the respondent's demand, he filed second OA being OA > >> >> No. > >> >> > >> >> 2633/2003 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, > >> >> New > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Delhi. That is how the question posed at the outset came for > >> >> consideration > >> >> > >> >> before the Tribunal. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 5.Perusal of the judgment of the Tribunal would reveal that the case > >> >> of > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> respondent before it was that once the Government had taken a decision > > to > >> >> > >> >> introduce reservation for physically handicapped persons in Group C > >> >> and > > D > >> > posts, > >> >> > >> >> and the post of COS was a Group C post, reservation had to be provided > > in > >> > this > >> >> > >> >> post as well and it could not be exempted on the purported ground that > >> > such a > >> >> > >> >> reservation was not possible because of the safe carriage of goods and > >> >> > >> >> passengers. It was stressed that job of COS is an office job and the > >> >> > >> >> disability, insofar as the physically handicapped is concerned, is in > > no > >> > manner > >> >> > >> >> going to put hindrance in the discharge of duties. The petitioner had > >> > given the > >> >> > >> >> following justification for not adopting the instructions of DoPT > >> >> dated > >> >> > >> >> 20.11.1989 :- > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (i) Every post at the lowest grade of entry has an avenue of > >> >> promotion. > >> >> > >> >> Some of the promotions, e.g. Khallasi to Khallasi Helper, Junior Clerk > > to > >> > Senior > >> >> > >> >> Clerk, Junior Chargeman to Senior Chargeman etc. are more or less > >> >> based > >> >> on > >> >> > >> >> proportionate distribution between the two grades, the higher grade > > being > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> compensation for more experience gained in basically the same nature > >> >> of > >> > duties. > >> >> > >> >> However, in more senior grades the nature of duties become markedly > >> > different, > >> >> > >> >> involving far greater mobility and far wider range of knowledge and > >> >> > >> >> responsibilities. This fact has been recognized by placing a selection > >> > between > >> >> > >> >> the lowest grades and the next higher grade. The selection procedures > > are > >> >> > >> >> necessarily stringent so as to ensure that only the really capable in > > all > >> >> > >> >> respects are put out to shoulder the much higher responsibilities > >> > devolving in > >> >> > >> >> the higher grade. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (ii) Difficulty in implementing reservation for physically handicapped > > in > >> >> > >> >> higher grades filled by promotion involving supervisory duties > > requiring > >> > fair > >> >> > >> >> amount of mobility and visual acuity. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (iii) In some cases promotions may involve transfer from the existing > >> >> > >> >> place of duty of the physically handicapped posting problem attendant > > on > >> >> > >> >> dislocation of the physically handicapped. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (iv) It has not been possible to fill the 3% quota prescribed for > >> >> > >> >> recruitment of physically handicapped persons in identified posts from > >> >> the > >> > open > >> >> > >> >> market. In fact there is a considerable backlog, the main reasons > >> >> being > >> >> > >> >> availability of limited number of posts/ categories identified for > >> > appointment > >> >> > >> >> of physically handicapped as against computation of vacancies for this > >> > purpose > >> >> > >> >> on the number of direct recruitment in both identified as well as > >> > non-identified > >> >> > >> >> categories. In this background with adequate number of physically > >> > handicapped > >> >> > >> >> persons no being there in the feeder grade we will be faced with a > >> > situation of > >> >> > >> >> perennial backlog and carry forward. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (v) Reservation in posts filled by promotion for physically > >> >> handicapped > >> >> > >> >> employee has also not been found necessary in view of the > >> > non-discriminatory > >> >> > >> >> provisions in place in the Railways in the matter of their promotion > >> >> along > >> > with > >> >> > >> >> others subject to their passing selection/suitability/trade test, as > >> > enjoined in > >> >> > >> >> Section 47(2) of the Disability Act. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (vi) Reservation as prescribed for physically handicapped is already > >> >> being > >> >> > >> >> followed at the initial stage of recruitment from the open market in > >> >> posts > >> >> > >> >> identified for being manned by appropriate category of handicapped as > >> > enjoined > >> >> > >> >> in Section 33 of the Disability Act. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (vii) The Railways, being an operational transport organization, > >> >> basically > >> >> > >> >> responsible for the safe carriage of goods and passengers, reservation > > in > >> >> > >> >> promotion for promotion for physically handicapped has not been found > > to > >> > be > >> >> > >> >> necessary. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 6.The Tribunal, in this detailed judgment, did not find favour with > >> >> any > >> >> of > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> arguments of the petitioner herein. It opined that having regard to > >> >> the > >> >> > >> >> objectives in providing such reservations, the benefit thereof had to > > be > >> > given > >> >> > >> >> to the respondent, more so when the post in question to which > >> >> promotion > >> >> is > >> > to be > >> >> > >> >> made is a Group C post and OM dated 20.11.1989 specifically provides > > for > >> >> > >> >> reservation in Group C posts. The Tribunal, thus, found that the > > alleged > >> > policy > >> >> > >> >> decision was totally arbitrary and without any rational or reasonable > >> > grounds. > >> >> > >> >> It went on to observe that it was a glaring example of arbitrariness > > and > >> >> > >> >> unreasonable classification, inasmuch as, for the same post of COS, in > >> >> the > >> >> > >> >> normal channel, the respondent could be considered and promoted and > >> > physical > >> >> > >> >> disability was not an impediment while, ironically, it becomes > > impediment > >> > when > >> >> > >> >> benefit of reservation is to be given. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 7.Before us similar arguments were advanced by the petitioner on the > >> >> basis > >> > of > >> >> > >> >> which the respondent's application was contested. It was stated in the > >> > first > >> >> > >> >> instance that Section 33 of the Disability Act does not provide for a > >> >> > >> >> reservation in the promotional post. Submission was that the > >> >> expression > >> >> > >> >> ?vacancies? occurring in Section 33 would relate to the vacancies only > > at > >> >> > >> >> induction level and not while making promotions. It was again stressed > >> > that > >> >> > >> >> though promotion was not to be denied to a person merely on the ground > > of > >> > his > >> >> > >> >> disability, at the same time, it was even the province of the > > appropriate > >> >> > >> >> Government to give regard to the type of work carried on in any > >> > establishment > >> >> > >> >> and on that basis decide as to whether for a particular job any such > >> > reservation > >> >> > >> >> is to be given to the persons suffering from disability, as provided > >> >> in > >> > Section > >> >> > >> >> 47 of the Disability Act. Learned counsel submitted that giving due > >> >> regard > >> > to > >> >> > >> >> the said provision the Ministry of Railways included the necessary > >> > provision > >> >> > >> >> under Para 189-A and Para 231-A of the Indian Railway Establishment > >> >> Manual > >> > Vol. > >> >> > >> >> I (Revised Edition 1989). Para 189-A reads as under :- > >> >> > >> >> ?189A : Promotion of persons with disability > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> There shall be no discrimination in the matter of promotion merely on > > the > >> >> > >> >> ground of physical disability. This will apply to categories of staff > > who > >> > have > >> >> > >> >> been recruited from the open market against the vacancies reserved for > >> >> > >> >> recruitment of physically handicapped and the staff who acquire > >> >> disability > >> >> > >> >> during service and are absorbed in suitable alternative employment as > > per > >> >> > >> >> provision contained in Ch. XIII. Such staff will be considered for > >> > promotion in > >> >> > >> >> their turn based on their eligibility and suitability along with > >> >> others > >> >> in > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> selection/ suitability/trade test for promotion to higher Grade post. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Para 231-A is identically worded > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 8.He also submitted that Section 47 only mandated that there would not > > be > >> > any > >> >> > >> >> discrimination in the matter of promotion and from this it would not > >> > follow that > >> >> > >> >> such a person is to be given ?preferential treatment?. Learned counsel > >> > also > >> >> > >> >> stated that a conscious policy decision was taken by the Railways > > keeping > >> > in > >> >> > >> >> view the duties of COS and it was decided that no such reservation > > could > >> > be > >> >> > >> >> given in the said post keeping in view the safety of the goods and > >> > passengers. > >> >> > >> >> His submission was that even the DoPT was apprised of the aforesaid > >> > decision and > >> >> > >> >> the logic behind the same and, therefore, it can be presumed that DoPT > >> >> had > >> > no > >> >> > >> >> objection to, or any dissensions on the Raiways decision to depart > >> >> from > >> > its > >> >> > >> >> policies. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 9.Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, supported the > >> > reasoning > >> >> > >> >> adopted by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment. He also referred to > > the > >> >> > >> >> provisions of the Disability Act and emphasized that liberal > >> > interpretation was > >> >> > >> >> to be given to the language of Sections 33 and 47 of the Disability > >> >> Act > >> >> in > >> > order > >> >> > >> >> to ensure that it subserves the purpose for which these provisions > >> >> were > >> >> > >> >> introduced in the said enactment. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 10.We have given our utmost consideration to the submissions of > >> >> counsel > >> >> on > >> > both > >> >> > >> >> sides. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 11.In order to reach the root of the issue, it would be necessary to > >> > understand > >> >> > >> >> the rational and reason for making provision for reservation in > >> >> employment > >> > for > >> >> > >> >> differently able persons under the Disability Act. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 12.Our constitutional governance, as envisaged, respects basic human > >> > rights and > >> >> > >> >> promotes human development in all situations wherein the dignity and > > the > >> > worth > >> >> > >> >> of an individual lies at the core of a democratic value. The noble > >> > objectives > >> >> > >> >> and rights enshrined in our Constitutional are to be materialized in > >> > regard to > >> >> > >> >> the entire Indian Society which also includes Communities that had > >> > remained > >> >> > >> >> disadvantaged and under developed due to various reasons and includes > >> > people > >> >> > >> >> with disabilities. It is the aim of any civilized society to secure > >> > dignity to > >> >> > >> >> every individual. There cannot be dignity without equality of status > > and > >> >> > >> >> opportunity. The absence of equal opportunities in any walk of social > >> >> life > >> > is a > >> >> > >> >> denial of equal status and equal participation in the affairs of the > >> > society, > >> >> > >> >> and therefore, of its equal membership. The dignity of the individual > > is > >> > dented > >> >> > >> >> and direct proportion to his deprivation of the equal access to social > >> > means. > >> >> > >> >> The democratic foundations are missing when equal opportunity to grow, > >> > govern > >> >> > >> >> and give one?s best to the society is denied to a sizable section of > > the > >> >> > >> >> society. The deprivation of the opportunities may be direct or > >> >> indirect > >> >> as > >> > when > >> >> > >> >> the wherewithals to avail of them are denied. Nevertheless, the > >> > consequences are > >> >> > >> >> as potent (See: Indira Sawhney v. Union of India AIR 1993 SC 477). > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 13.Let us understand the rights of disabled with aforesaid > > constitutional > >> >> > >> >> mandate in mind. Disability is a result both of the biological > > condition > >> > of the > >> >> > >> >> individual and of the social status that attaches to that biological > >> > condition. > >> >> > >> >> Till recently, persons with disabilities were depicted not as subjects > > of > >> > legal > >> >> > >> >> rights but as objects of welfare, health and charity programs. The > >> > underlying > >> >> > >> >> policy had been to segregate and exclude people with disabilities from > >> >> > >> >> mainstream society, sometimes providing them with special schools, > >> > sheltered > >> >> > >> >> workshops, special housing and transportation. This policy was > > perceived > >> > as just > >> >> > >> >> because disabled persons were believed incapable of coping with both > >> > society at > >> >> > >> >> large and all or most major life activities. A Division Bench of this > >> > Court in > >> >> > >> >> Social Jurist, A Lawyers Group v. UOI and Ors. 2002 VI AD (DELHI) 217 > > was > >> > forced > >> >> > >> >> to pass the following comments: > >> >> > >> >> ?It is the common experience of several persons with disabilities that > >> > they are > >> >> > >> >> unable to lead a full life due to societal barriers and discrimination > >> > faced by > >> >> > >> >> them in employment, access to public spaces, transportation etc. > > Persons > >> > with > >> >> > >> >> disability are most neglected lot not only in the society but also in > > the > >> >> > >> >> family. More often they are an object of pity. There are hardly any > >> > meaningful > >> >> > >> >> attempts to assimilate them in the mainstream of the Nation's life. > >> >> The > >> > apathy > >> >> > >> >> towards their problems is so pervasive that even the number of > >> >> disabled > >> > persons > >> >> > >> >> existing in the country is not well documented. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> T.R.Dye, Policy Analyst, in his book `Understanding Public Policy' > > says: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ``Conditions in society which are not defined as a problem and for > > which > >> >> > >> >> alternatives are never proposed, never become policy issues. > >> >> Government > >> > does > >> >> > >> >> nothing and conditions remain the same.'` > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> This statement amply applies in the case of the disabled. At least > >> >> this > >> > was the > >> >> > >> >> position till few years ago. The condition of the disabled in the > > society > >> > was > >> >> > >> >> not defined as a problem, and therefore, it did not become public > > issue. > >> > It is > >> >> > >> >> not that this problem was not addressed. Various NGOs, Authors, Human > >> > Rights > >> >> > >> >> Groups have been focusing on this problem from time to time and for > > quite > >> >> > >> >> sometime. But it was not defined as a problem which could become > >> >> public > >> > issue. > >> >> > >> >> Until the realisation dawned on the Government and the policy makers > > that > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> right of the disabled was also a human right issue. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> xxx xxx xxx > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Various kinds of rights are recognised in this legislation which is on > >> >> the > >> >> > >> >> Statute book for last about 6 years now but the question is as to > > whether > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> Act is implemented in its true spirit and the rights conferred upon > >> > disabled > >> >> > >> >> under this Act have been translated into reality?? Whether the > >> >> disabled > >> > are able > >> >> > >> >> to reap the fruits of this legislation?? The present case is a pointer > > to > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> fact that all is still not well. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Unless the mindset of the public changes; unless the attitude of the > >> > persons and > >> >> > >> >> officials who are given the duty of implementation of? this? Act? > >> >> changes, > >> >> > >> >> whatever? rights are granted to the disabled under? the Act, would > > remain > >> > on > >> >> > >> >> paper.? > >> >> > >> >> 14. The subject of the rights of people with disabilities should be > >> > approached > >> >> > >> >> from human rights perspective, which recognizes that persons with > >> > disabilities > >> >> > >> >> are entitled to enjoy the full range of guaranteed rights and freedoms > >> > without > >> >> > >> >> discrimination on the ground of disability. There should be a full > >> > recognition > >> >> > >> >> of the fact that persons with disability are the integral part of the > >> > community, > >> >> > >> >> equal in dignity and entitled to enjoy the same human rights and > > freedoms > >> > as > >> >> > >> >> others. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 15.With this objective in mind the Disability Act was enacted. The > >> > Disability > >> >> > >> >> Act enacts a disability-equality law and does not limit itself to > >> > prohibiting > >> >> > >> >> discrimination, but addresses a wide range of issues relating to > > persons > >> > with > >> >> > >> >> disabilities. It is the legislative attempt to open up employment, > >> > education, > >> >> > >> >> housing, and goods and services for persons regardless of their > >> > disabilities in > >> >> > >> >> order to change the understanding of disability from a medical to a > >> >> social > >> >> > >> >> category. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 16.Therefore, providing employment to persons with disability is > >> > absolutely > >> >> > >> >> essential. As, with unemployment, comes isolation and fewer > > opportunities > >> > to > >> >> > >> >> participate in the life of a community or in recreational and social > >> > activities. > >> >> > >> >> Thus, a human rights approach offers both the platform for such > > societal > >> >> > >> >> transformation and a way for disabled people to transform their sense > > of > >> > who > >> >> > >> >> they are ? from stigmatised objects of care to valued subjects of > >> >> their > >> > own > >> >> > >> >> lives. For people who are poor and oppressed this is a key starting > > point > >> > of any > >> >> > >> >> meaningful process of social and economic development. According to > >> >> Gerard > >> > Quinn > >> >> > >> >> and Theresia Degener (Human rights and disability: The current use and > >> > future > >> >> > >> >> potential of United Nations human rights instruments in the context of > >> >> > >> >> disability. Geneva, Office of the High Commission for Human Rights. > >> >> (2002) > >> >> > >> >> Available at, http://193.194.138.190/disability/study.htm, p.1.):- > >> >> > >> >> ?[T]he human rights perspective means viewing people with disabilities > > as > >> >> > >> >> subjects and not as objects. It entails moving away from viewing > >> >> people > >> > with > >> >> > >> >> disabilities as problems toward viewing them as rights holders. > >> > Importantly, it > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> means locating any problems outside the person and especially in the > >> > manner by > >> >> > >> >> which various economic and social processes accommodate the difference > > of > >> >> > >> >> disability or not as the case may be. The debate about disability > > rights > >> > is > >> >> > >> >> therefore connected to a larger debate about the place of difference > >> >> in > >> >> > >> >> society.? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 17.Introduction of provisions like Section 33 and Section 47 of the > >> > Disability > >> >> > >> >> Act is to be seen with this objective in mind. > >> >> > >> >> 18.The conjoint reading of Sections 33 and 47 of the Disability Act > >> >> giving > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> interpretation which these provisions deserve, we are of the opinion > > that > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> persons with disability would be entitled to reservation even in > >> >> promotion > >> > if > >> >> > >> >> the promotion is to Group C and D post. For the sake of convenience, > >> >> we > >> >> > >> >> reproduce Sections 33 and 47(2) of the Disability Act, which are to > >> >> the > >> >> > >> >> following effect :- > >> >> > >> >> ?33. Reservation of posts. - Every appropriate Government shall > >> >> appoint > >> >> in > >> >> > >> >> every establishment such percentage of vacancies not less than three > > per > >> > cent > >> >> > >> >> for persons or class of persons with disability of which one per cent > >> >> each > >> > shall > >> >> > >> >> be reserved for persons suffering from - > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (i) blindness or low vision; > >> >> > >> >> (ii) hearing impairment; > >> >> > >> >> (iii) locomotor disability or cerebral palsy, > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> in the posts identified for each disability: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Provided that the appropriate Government may, having regard to the > >> >> type > >> >> of > >> > work > >> >> > >> >> carried on in any department or establishment, by notification subject > > to > >> > such > >> >> > >> >> conditions, if any, as may be specified in such notification, exempt > > any > >> >> > >> >> establishment from the provisions of this section. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> xx xx xx > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 47. Non-discrimination in Government employment. - > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (1) xx xx xx > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (2) No promotion shall be denied to a person merely on the ground of > > his > >> >> > >> >> disability: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Provided that the appropriate Government may, having regard to the > >> >> type > >> >> of > >> > work > >> >> > >> >> carried on in any establishment, by notification and subject to such > >> > conditions, > >> >> > >> >> if any, as may be specified in such notification, exempt any > >> >> establishment > >> > from > >> >> > >> >> the provisions of this section.? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 19.We may also reproduce here the relevant OM dated 20.11.1989 of the > >> > DoPT, > >> >> > >> >> which reads as under :- > >> >> > >> >> ?12. Reservation for the physically handicapped in Groups 'C' and 'D' > >> >> > >> >> posts filled by promotion. - It has been decided that when promotions > > are > >> > being > >> >> > >> >> made (i) within Group 'D', (ii) from Group 'D' to Group 'C' and (iii) > >> > within > >> >> > >> >> Group 'C', reservation will be provided for the three categories of > >> >> the > >> >> > >> >> physically handicapped persons, namely, the visually handicapped, the > >> > hearing > >> >> > >> >> handicapped and the orthopaedically handicapped. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> The applicability of the reservation will, however, be limited to the > >> >> > >> >> promotions being made to those posts that are identified as being > > capable > >> > of > >> >> > >> >> being filled/held by the appropriate category of physically > > handicapped. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 2. Each of the three categories of the physically handicapped persons > >> >> will > >> >> > >> >> be allowed reservation at one per cent each. Though the reservations > > will > >> > be > >> >> > >> >> effective only in those posts that are identified as being capable of > >> > being held > >> >> > >> >> by the appropriate category of the physically handicapped persons, the > >> > number of > >> >> > >> >> vacancies that will be reserved for the physically handicapped persons > >> > when > >> >> > >> >> promotions are being made to such identified posts will be computed by > >> > taking > >> >> > >> >> into account the total number of vacancies that arise for being filled > > by > >> >> > >> >> promotion in a recruitment year both in the non-identified as well as > >> > identified > >> >> > >> >> posts. If the appropriate category of the physically handicapped > > persons > >> > are > >> >> > >> >> not available in the feeder grade from which promotion is being made > >> >> to > >> > the next > >> >> > >> >> higher grade of the identified posts, then an inter se exchange will > >> >> be > >> >> > >> >> permitted subject to the conditions that - > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (i) the post to which promotion is to be made is one that can be held > > by > >> >> > >> >> the category of the physically handicapped persons available in the > >> >> feeder > >> >> > >> >> grade; and > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (ii) the reservation so exchanged is carried forward to the next three > >> >> > >> >> recruitment years after which the reservation shall lapse.? > >> >> > >> >> As per the aforesaid OM, reservation for physically handicapped in > > Group > >> >> > >> >> C and D posts, even when filled by promotion, is prescribed. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 20.As noticed above, prior to the Disability Act coming into force, > >> >> the > >> >> > >> >> Government had, by administrative instructions, provided reservation > > for > >> >> > >> >> physically handicapped persons in Group C and D posts. After the > >> > Disability Act > >> >> > >> >> came into force, such a reservation is now permissible even for Group > >> >> A > >> > and B > >> >> > >> >> posts. This led the DoPT to issue OM dated 18.12.1997. Referring to > >> > Section 33 > >> >> > >> >> of the Disability Act, this OM mentions that the reservation stands > >> > extended to > >> >> > >> >> identified Group A and B posts filled through direct recruitment. In > > this > >> > OM, > >> >> > >> >> however, it is stated that such reservation would be termed as > > horizontal > >> >> > >> >> reservation in contradistinction to the reservation of SC/ST > >> >> candidates > >> > where > >> >> > >> >> reservation is available at horizontal as well as vertical level with > > the > >> >> > >> >> principle of interlocking of vertical and horizontal reservations, as > >> >> laid > >> > down > >> >> > >> >> by the Supreme Court in the case of Indira Sawhney v. Union of India > > and > >> > Ors., > >> >> > >> >> AIR 1993 SC 477. Though as per this OM for Group A and B posts the > >> > reservation > >> >> > >> >> was only at induction level, significantly corrigendum was issued by > > the > >> > DoPT > >> >> > >> >> vide OM dated 4.7.1997, which reads as under :- > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ?Subject: Reservation for the physically handicapped persons in Group > >> >> A > >> > and B > >> >> > >> >> Posts/Services under the Central Government. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> The undersigned is directed to invite attention to this department's > > O.M. > >> > No. > >> >> > >> >> 36035/169/91-Estt.(SCT) dated 18.2.97 on the above subject and to say > >> >> that > >> > it > >> >> > >> >> has been represented before the Government that the earmarking of > > points > >> > no. 33, > >> >> > >> >> 67 and 100 in the prescribed register for reservation for the > > physically > >> >> > >> >> handicapped would mean that the physically handicapped candidates may > >> >> have > >> > to > >> >> > >> >> wait for a long time to get their turn for promotion. The suggestion > > has > >> > been > >> >> > >> >> considered and it has now been decided in partial modification of the > >> >> O.M. > >> > cited > >> >> > >> >> above that the point number of 34 and 67 in cycle of 100 vacancies in > > the > >> > 100 > >> >> > >> >> point register and be marked for reservation for physically > > handicapped. > >> > The > >> >> > >> >> other instructions contained in the aforesaid O.M. remains unchanged. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Sd/- > >> >> > >> >> (Y.G. Parande) > >> >> > >> >> Director? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 21.It is clear from the above that point No.34 and 67 in the cycle of > > 100 > >> > are > >> >> > >> >> now earmarked for reservation for physically handicapped and, thus, > >> > reservation > >> >> > >> >> is admissible even for Group A and B posts in promotion category and > > not > >> > only at > >> >> > >> >> the induction level. We are of the opinion that this OM is brought in > >> >> tune > >> > with > >> >> > >> >> the letter and spirit behind Section 33 of the Disability Act. On > >> >> > >> >> interpretation of such a provision legal position is abundantly clear. > >> > This is > >> >> > >> >> a benevolent measure introduced to ameliorate the sufferings of > >> >> persons > >> > who are > >> >> > >> >> physically disabled. Such a provision is to be given the widest > > possible > >> >> > >> >> interpretation. The objective is to achieve the purpose for which such > > a > >> >> > >> >> provision is introduced by the Parliament. The Apex Court in Kunal > > Singh > >> > v. > >> >> > >> >> Union of India AIR 2003 SC 1623 held that: > >> >> > >> >> ``9. Chapter VI of the Act deals with employment relating to persons > > with > >> >> > >> >> disabilities, who are yet to secure employment. Section 47, which > >> >> falls > >> >> in > >> >> > >> >> Chapter VIII, deals with an employee, who is already in service and > >> > acquires a > >> >> > >> >> disability during his service. It must be borne in mind that Section 2 > > of > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> Act has given distinct and different definitions of ``disability'` and > >> > ``person > >> >> > >> >> with disability'`. It is well settled that in the same enactment if > >> >> two > >> > distinct > >> >> > >> >> definitions are given defining a word/expression, they must be > > understood > >> >> > >> >> accordingly in terms of the definition. It must be remembered that a > >> > person does > >> >> > >> >> not acquire or suffer disability by choice. An employee, who acquires > >> > disability > >> >> > >> >> during his service, is sought to be protected under Section 47 of the > > Act > >> >> > >> >> specifically. Such employee, acquiring disability, if not protected, > >> >> would > >> > not > >> >> > >> >> only suffer himself, but possibly all those who depend on him would > > also > >> > suffer. > >> >> > >> >> The very frame and contents of Section 47 clearly indicate its > > mandatory > >> > nature. > >> >> > >> >> The very opening part of the section reads ``no establishment shall > >> > dispense > >> >> > >> >> with, or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during > > his > >> >> > >> >> service'`. The section further provides that if an employee after > >> > acquiring > >> >> > >> >> disability is not suitable for the post he was holding, could be > > shifted > >> > to some > >> >> > >> >> other post with the same pay scale and service benefits; if it is not > >> > possible > >> >> > >> >> to adjust the employee against any post he will be kept on a > >> >> supernumerary > >> > post > >> >> > >> >> until a suitable post is available or he attains the age of > >> > superannuation, > >> >> > >> >> whichever is earlier. Added to this no promotion shall be denied to a > >> > person > >> >> > >> >> merely on the ground of his disability as is evident from sub-section > > (2) > >> > of > >> >> > >> >> Section 47. Section 47 contains a clear directive that the employer > > shall > >> > not > >> >> > >> >> dispense with or reduce in rank an employee who acquires a disability > >> > during the > >> >> > >> >> service. In construing a provision of a social beneficial enactment > > that > >> > too > >> >> > >> >> dealing with disabled persons intended to give them equal > > opportunities, > >> >> > >> >> protection of rights and full participation, the view that advances > >> >> the > >> > object > >> >> > >> >> of the Act and serves its purpose must be preferred to the one which > >> > obstructs > >> >> > >> >> the object and paralyses the purpose of the Act. Language of Section > >> >> 47 > >> >> is > >> > plain > >> >> > >> >> and certain casting statutory obligation on the employer to protect an > >> > employee > >> >> > >> >> acquiring disability during service.'` > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 22.This Court dealing with Section 33 of the Disability Act in All > > India > >> >> > >> >> Confederation of the Blind v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. 2005 > >> >> (123) > >> > DLT 244 > >> >> > >> >> clearly laid down that the Disability act is a benevolent legislation > > and > >> > it has > >> >> > >> >> been repeatedly held that benevolent enactments ought to be given > > liberal > >> > and > >> >> > >> >> expansive interpretation, and not narrow or restrictive construction > > (see > >> > Madan > >> >> > >> >> Singh Shekhawat v. Union of India; 1996 (6) SCC 459; Deepal Girishbhai > >> > Soni v. > >> >> > >> >> United India Insurance Co. Ltd., AIR 2004 SC 2107; Babu Parasakaikadi > > v. > >> > Babu > >> >> > >> >> 2004 (1) SCC 681). > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 23.Where alternative constructions are possible the court must give > >> >> effect > >> > to > >> >> > >> >> that which will be responsible for the smooth working of the system > >> >> for > >> > which > >> >> > >> >> the statute has been enacted rather than the one which would put > >> > hindrances in > >> >> > >> >> its way. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 24.If the choice is between two interpretations, the narrower of which > >> > would > >> >> > >> >> fail to achieve the manifest purpose of the legislation we should > >> >> avoid > > a > >> >> > >> >> construction which would reduce the legislation to futility and should > >> > rather > >> >> > >> >> accept the bolder construction based on the view that Parliament would > >> > legislate > >> >> > >> >> only for the purpose of bringing about an effective result. - Nokes v. > >> > Doncaster > >> >> > >> >> Amalgamated Collieries Ltd (1940) A.C. 1014. Where alternative > >> > constructions are > >> >> > >> >> equally open, that alternative is to be chosen which will be > >> >> consistent > >> > with the > >> >> > >> >> smooth working of the system which the statute purports to be > > regulating; > >> > and > >> >> > >> >> that alternative is to be rejected which will introduce uncertainty, > >> > fiction or > >> >> > >> >> confusion into the working of the system.- Shannon Realities Ltd v. > > Ville > >> > de St > >> >> > >> >> Michel (1924) A.C. 185. [Maxwell pg. 45]. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 25.It is well settled principle of law that as the statute is an edict > > of > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> Legislature, the conventional way of interpreting or construing a > > statute > >> > is to > >> >> > >> >> seek the intention of legislature. The intention of legislature > >> > assimilates two > >> >> > >> >> aspects; one aspect carries the concept of ?meaning?, i.e., what the > > word > >> > means > >> >> > >> >> and another aspect conveys the concept of ?purpose? and ?object? or > >> >> the > >> > ?reason? > >> >> > >> >> or ?spirit? pervading through the statute. The process of > >> >> construction, > >> >> > >> >> therefore, combines both the literal and purposive approaches. > >> >> However, > >> >> > >> >> necessity of interpretation would arise only where the language of a > >> > statutory > >> >> > >> >> provision is ambiguous, not clear or where two views are possible or > >> >> where > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> provision gives a different meaning defeating the object of the > > statute. > >> > If the > >> >> > >> >> language is clear and unambiguous, no need of interpretation would > > arise. > >> > In > >> >> > >> >> this regard, a Constitution Bench of five Judges of the Supreme Court > > in > >> > R.S. > >> >> > >> >> Nayak v A.R. Antulay, AIR 1984 SC 684 has held: > >> >> > >> >> ??If the words of the Statute are clear and unambiguous, it is the > >> > plainest duty > >> >> > >> >> of the Court to give effect to the natural meaning of the words used > >> >> in > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> provision. The question of construction arises only in the event of an > >> > ambiguity > >> >> > >> >> or the plain meaning of the words used in the Statute would be self > >> > defeating.? > >> >> > >> >> (para 18) > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 26.In Grasim Industries Ltd. v Collector of Customs, Bombay, (2002) 4 > > SCC > >> > 297 > >> >> > >> >> has followed the same principle and observed: > >> >> > >> >> 27.?Where the words are clear and there is no obscurity, and there is > > no > >> >> > >> >> ambiguity and the intention of the legislature is clearly conveyed, > > there > >> > is no > >> >> > >> >> scope for court to take upon itself the task of amending or altering > > the > >> >> > >> >> statutory provisions.? (para 10) > >> >> > >> >> 28.Once this matter is seen from this perspective and we have to > >> >> ensure > >> > that > >> >> > >> >> persons suffering from disability also grow in stature and for this > >> >> reason > >> >> > >> >> reservation is provided in the employment, limiting the same only at > > the > >> >> > >> >> induction level and not in the matter of promotions would be totally > >> > unjust. > >> >> > >> >> Therefore, in view of the aforesaid provision, coupled with the > >> > interpretation > >> >> > >> >> of the Government itself provided vide OM dated 20.11.1989 and > >> >> corrigendum > >> > dated > >> >> > >> >> 4.7.1997, reservation has to be provided in the matter of promotions > >> >> as > >> > well. > >> >> > >> >> 29.In this context we now examine as to whether persons like the > >> > respondent > >> >> > >> >> could be deprived of the benefit on the basis of the purported policy > >> > decision. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 30.We feel that as per the petitioner's own argument, purported policy > >> > decision > >> >> > >> >> is arbitrary and irrational and there is no justification from > > deviating > >> > from > >> >> > >> >> the Government's policy contained in aforesaid OMs. The post of COS is > > a > >> > Group > >> >> > >> >> C post and reservation to Group C post is provided as per the DoPT > >> > circular and > >> >> > >> >> the Railways own policy. Therefore, in normal course there appears to > > be > >> > no > >> >> > >> >> reason not to provide reservation for persons suffering with > >> >> disability > >> >> to > >> > this > >> >> > >> >> post. The so-called policy decision of the petitioner, to ensure safe > >> > carriage > >> >> > >> >> of goods and passengers, whereby the petitioner do not want to give > >> > reservation > >> >> > >> >> for the said post to physically handicapped persons is not only unjust > >> >> but > >> >> > >> >> aggravates the suffering of persons living/employed with disability. > >> > Further, > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> it is to be noted that the petitioner do not deny that a person > > suffering > >> > from > >> >> > >> >> physical disability is entitled to promotion to this very post in > > normal > >> > course. > >> >> > >> >> We fail to understand as to how when such physically handicapped > >> >> person > >> > gets > >> >> > >> >> promotion to the post of COS in the normal course would be able to > >> > discharge the > >> >> > >> >> function of that post satisfactorily but would not be able to do so if > > he > >> > is > >> >> > >> >> promoted to this post under the reservation quota. Ironically, this > >> >> was > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> argument of learned counsel for the petitioner before the Tribunal > >> >> that > >> >> in > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> normal course, despite being handicap, the respondent herein was > > eligible > >> > to be > >> >> > >> >> considered in the selection for promotion to Group C post of COS > > subject > >> > to his > >> >> > >> >> qualification in the selection. If selection by promotion to such a > > post > >> > under > >> >> > >> >> normal channel is available to a person like the respondent and his > >> > handicapped- > >> >> > >> >> ness, in that eventuality, does not come in way of discharging his > >> >> duties, > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> reason for not providing reservation on this ground is contradictory > >> >> in > >> > terms > >> >> > >> >> and cannot be sustained. Such a justification for denying reservation > > is > >> >> > >> >> totally irrational and arbitrary. It, rather, depicts closed and > >> >> narrow > >> > minded > >> >> > >> >> approach of the petitioner, which is unsustainable in view of the > >> > discussion > >> >> > >> >> above. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 31.As a consequence of the aforesaid discussion, we uphold the > >> >> judgment > >> >> of > >> > the > >> >> > >> >> Tribunal and dismiss these writ petitions with costs quantified at > >> > Rs.10,000/- > >> >> > >> >> each. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (A.K. SIKRI) > >> >> > >> >> JUDGE > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> (VIPIN SANGHI) > >> >> > >> >> JUDGE > >> >> > >> >> December 07, 2007 > >> >> > >> >> nsk > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> To unsubscribe send a message to > >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > with the subject unsubscribe. > >> >> > >> >> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, > >> > please visit the list home page at > >> >> > >> > > > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > >> > > >> > > >> > To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > with the subject unsubscribe. > >> > > >> > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, > >> > please visit the list home page at > >> > > > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > >> > >> > >> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with the subject unsubscribe. > >> > >> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, > > please visit the list home page at > >> > > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > > > > To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with the subject unsubscribe. > > > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, > > please visit the list home page at > > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please > visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in
