Dear friends:

am forwarding herewith an e-mail received from a friend.  If any of you could 
help him with regard to the information sought for by him, please do that.

With regards from 

k. srinivas.

 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: A. KUMARESAN 
To: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; 
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; 
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; 
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; 
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; 
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] 
; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; 
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; 
[email protected] 
Cc: [email protected] ; [email protected] 
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 12:43 AM
Subject: Harish Chandra


      Sir/Madam,
      I am forwarding herewith an e-mail received from a friend.  If any of you 
could help him with regard to the information sought for by him, please do that.
      With regards from A. KUMARESAN

      --- On Thu, 11/4/13, hcjrmm . <[email protected]> wrote:


        From: hcjrmm . <[email protected]>
        Subject: 
        To: [email protected]
        Date: Thursday, 11 April, 2013, 12:58 PM


        Dear Kumaresan,

        I am Harish Chandra, working as Chief Project Manager in IndianOlil
        Corporation Limited, and become hearing impaired in 2003 probably due
        to excessive stress because of discriminatory approach of Indian Oil
        Management. After CCPD decision(2011) in favour of IOCL expressing
        their inability to interfere in rules & regulation of IOCL which are
        contradictory to PWD act 1995 and various circular/ OMs Issued by
        Govt. of India,I approached to Delhi High Court Through W.P.(C) 6528/
        2012 .

        I am interested to know the detail status of the attached case of
        Bombay High court & its final documented outcome .

        If you have any other case judgment which are not available in High
        court /Supreme Court site, Kindly forward  the same also which might
        help me.

        Regards,

        Harish Chandra
        Mob. 9873189950
        Alternate  e.mail : [email protected]
        Chief Project Manager,
        Indian Oil Corporation Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPEALLATE JURISDICTIONWRIT 
PETITION NO. 3294 OF 2010table end Mrs. Nilima Anant Surve. ..Petitioner. 
Vs.The State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents. WITH  WRIT PETITION NO.7824 
OF 2007Mrs. Nandita Dubey/Tripathi. ..Petitioner. Vs.The State of Maharashtra 
and ors. ..Respondents.WITHPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 70 OF 2002ILS Legal 
and Centre and ors. ..Petitioner.Vs.The State of Maharashtra and ors. 
..Respondents.WITHPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.75 OF 2006Satyashodh and 
others. ..Petitioner.Vs.The State of Maharashtra and ors. 
..Respondents.WITHPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.129 OF 2003The National 
Federation of BlindMaharashtra. ..Petitioner.Vs.The State of Maharashtra and 
ors. ..Respondents. ASN 2 WP-3494andors..sxwWITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO.50 OF 
2007INPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.129 OF 2003 The National Federation of 
Blind, Maharashtra. ..Petitioner.Vs.The State of Maharashtra and ors. 
..Respondents.WITHPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.139 OF 2006Maharashtra Rajya 
Apang KarmachariSanghatana. ..Petitioner.Vs.The State of Maharashtra and ors. 
..Respondents.WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 54 OF 2007INPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION 
NO.139 OF 2006Sudhakar Ramchandra Karegaonkar and ors. ..PetitionersVs.The 
State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents.WITHPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION 
NO.225 OF 2009Harshad Govind Jadhav and ors. ..Petitioners.Vs.The State of 
Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents.WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.44 OF 
2009ASN 3 WP-3494andors..sxwIndia Centre for Human Right and Lawand ors. 
..Petitioners.Vs.The State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents.WITHPUBLIC 
INTEREST LITIGATION NO.118 OF 2010Rashtriya Apang Vikas Mahasangh. 
..Petitioners.Vs.The State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents.Mr.Chetan 
Agarwal, Advocate for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.3294 of 2010.Mr.Ravi 
Kadam, Advocate General along with Mr. N.P.Deshpande,A.G.P.for Respondent Nos. 
1 to 3. Mr. Rahul Walvekar for Resondent No.5.Mr.A.A.Inamdar i/by M.S.Karnik 
for Respondent No.3 in Writ Petition No.7824of 2007.Mr. Uday Warunjikar for the 
petitioner in PIL No.75/2006 with PIL No.129/2003. Ms. Kanchan Pamnani for 
Respondent No.5. Mrs. Gayatri Singh along withKranti L.C. for the petitioner in 
Original Side PIL No.118/2010. Mr. Rungta, Advocate for Nilima Surve present. 
Mr. Satish Gavai, Princiapl Secretary, Social Justice Department present. 
Mr.J.N.Rathod, Dy. Secretary, Social Justice Department present Mr. B.R.Jadhav, 
Commissioner of Disabailities present.Mr.A.P.Valvi from Commissioner of 
Disabilities present. Mr. Pradip Vyas, Secretary, Finance Department present. 
Mrs.N.M.Shaikh, Dy. Secretary, FinanceDepartment present. Mr.V.N.More, 
Secretary, General Administration Department present. Mr.S.N.Rankhambe, Dy. 
Secretary, General AdministrationDepartmen present. Mr.Abhay N. Tripathy, 
Secretary, MPSC present. Dr. Bhushan Punani, Executive Director of Blind 
People's Association, Ahmedabad present.Mr.K.K.Kothari,N.G.O. Sight Savers 
present.ASN 4 WP-3494andors..sxwMr. Sam Taraporvala, Associate Professor, HOD 
of Sociology, St. XavierCollege present.Mr. Prashant M. Naik, Project Manager, 
XRCVC present. Mr. K. Ramkrishnan, General Secretary, National Association for 
the Blind (India) present.Mr. Rajesh, Assistant General Manager, RBI Nagpur 
present. Mr. Satish Gavai, Princiapl Secretary, Social Justice Department 
present. Major General Cardoso, Chairman, Rehabilitation Centre of India 
present. Mr.H.P.Kotian, Assistant General Manager (Primary Data Centre) 
R.B.I.Present. Mr. Prakash Padangale from National Federation of Blinds 
present. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & S. J. VAZIFDAR, J. SATURDAY, JANUARY 15, 
2011. PC :Leave to add Union of India as party-respondent through theSecretary 
of Human Resources Department and also Secretary SocialJustice Department, New 
Delhi.Leave also to add Medical Council of India as party-respondent.Having 
heard the representatives of the Non Government Organizations, it clearly 
appears that there are a number of technical devices and software which are 
specially designed for visually challenged persons and they are available in 
the market and if such  technical devices and software are made available by 
the State Government to the visually challenged persons, then their employment  
opportunities and efficiency in service would be greater. ASN 5 
WP-3494andors..sxw When the Disabilities Act provides for reservation of one 
percent posts for the visually challenged persons in public sector, such 
reservation would be meaningless, if such technical devices or softwareare not 
provided by the State Government from the public exchequer.We therefore, 
constitute the following group to assist all the GovernmentDepartments through 
the Department of Social Justice for procuring thetechnical devices and the 
software specially prepared for visuallychallenged persons: table with 7 
columns and 7 rowsi. Principal Secretary, Social Justice Department;ii. 
Principal Secretary, Education Department;iii. Principal Secretary, Finance 
Department;iv. The Commissioner of Disabilities;v. Dr.Bhushan Punani,Executive 
Director,Blind People's Association, Ahmedabad;vi.  Mr. K.A.Kothari, Sight 
Savers; table end  vii. Dr. Sam Taraporevala, Associate Professor, St. Xavier's 
College and Director of Xavier's Resource Centre for the Visually Challenged; 
viii.Ms. Kanchan Pamnani, Advocate;ix.Mr. H.P. Kotian, Asstt. General Manager 
(Primary Data Centre) Reserve Bank of India;x.Mr. K. Ramkrishanan, General 
Secretary, National Association of Blind(India);xi.Mr. Prashant Naik, Project 
Manager, St. Xavier's Resource Centre for the  Visually challenged.4 We are 
informed by Dr. Bhushan Punani, ExecutiveDirector, Blind People's Association, 
Ahmedabad who is also a memberof Drafting Committee for the New Law on Persons 
with DisabilitiesASN 6 WP-3494andors..sxwthat visually challenged persons have 
a large scope for employment inInformation Technology Sector and Banking 
sector. The above groupwill also explore the prospects for visually challenged 
persons in theabove sectors and the training to be provided to visually 
challengedpersons seeking employment in public or private sectors and also to 
thepersons with this disability already in service and those who will 
berecruited in future.5 Having heard the representatives of the Non 
GovernmentOrganizations, the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned 
AdvocateGeneral and the Principal Secretary, Social Justice Department and 
other officers of the Government of Maharashtra, it appears that under the 
IEDSS at the secondary level and Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, fundsprovided by 
Government of India are to be allocated to the variousdepartments of the State 
of Maharashtra. It appears that as against the funds for which the State of 
Maharashtra had requested for persons with disabilities, the funds  allocated 
are much less.6 The Union of India shall therefore, show cause as to why  this 
Court should not give appropriate directions to see that implementation of the 
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full 
Participation) Act,1995 is not defeated in the State of Maharashtra by 
allocation of insufficient funds to the State of Maharashtra.ASN 7 
WP-3494andors..sxwIt appears that as against the funds for which the State 
ofMaharashtra had requested for persons with disabilities, the fundsallocated 
are much less. 7 The learned counsel for the petitioners and the 
representatives of the Non Government Organizations submit that the Social 
Justice Department of Union of India had issued a Notification in the year 2001 
under Section 32 of the P.W.D. Act and the said notification has been revised 
in the year 2004 and 2007. The schedule to  the notification gives the 
particulars of the posts which are identified as  posts on which persons with 
disabilities can be appointed and there is  no reason why the same list should 
not be adopted by the State of  Maharashtra, as has been done by the States of 
Rajasthan, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Uttaranchal. 8 Having heard the 
representatives of the petitioners and the State Government Officers, we are of 
the view that the Government shall  show cause why the State Government should 
not be directed to apply  the notification issued by the Central Government 
where the posts are similar and only the nomenclature of posts is different. It 
will be open to  the State Government to make necessary changes in the 
nomenclature of the posts identified by the Central Government which are 
carrying the Sixth Pay Commission pay scale. The State Government shall 
therefore,show cause, within six weeks from today, as to why the said 
notification should not be applied to the State. ASN 8 WP-3494andors..sxw9 
According to the State Government there are 2,44,000 posts in the State 
Government service and the list containing break up is alsoproduced at the time 
of hearing. It is stated that applying three per cent reservation, 10690 posts 
are required to be earmarked for persons with  disabilities and out of them as 
many as 10045 are already filled in by persons with disabilities. This 
assertion is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners and it is 
submitted that due weightage is not given to the  persons with disabilities in 
each of the three categories. In view of the above controversy, we direct that 
detailed break up of the posts on which person in each category of the> 
disabilities are appointed so far, should be furnished within six weeks.Even in 
the category of visually challenged persons, the State Government shall give 
break up of the persons indicating those with full loss of vision and those 
having low vision. 10 At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners 
submit that reservation of three percent is being applied to the vacancies 
arisingafter coming into force of the Persons With Disabilities Act but three 
percent reservation should be applied to the total number of posts which is 
more than 11,48,605. We are not expressing any opinion on the controversy and 
it is kept open. It will be considered in future. ASN 9 WP-3494andors..sxw 11 
The Health Department of State of Maharashtra shall issue instructions to all 
the Medical Boards and Superintendents of the Public Hospitals that when a 
candidate, selected for a post which is reserved for a physically challenged 
person, appears for medical examination, he cannot be declared unfit or 
unsuitable for the post by the concerned Medical Board or Superintendent of the 
Public Hospital on the ground  that he is medically unfit because of that 
particular disability. 12 Major General Cardozo states that very often members 
of  the Medical Board who examine persons with disabilities do not have a 
proper perspective about the object of medical examination of persons with 
disabilities. He suggests that the Medical Council of India should include, as 
a part of syllabus for under graduate as well as post  graduate medical 
courses, a special subject pertaining to "Persons withDisabilities". The 
Medical Council of India is permitted to be joined as party respondent and 
shall respond to the above suggestion at the next  hearing. 13 The learned 
Advocate General states that the State Government has prepared a draft Action 
Plan for Persons with Disabilities to be implemented from April, 2011 onwards. 
The State Government shall, within four weeks from today, publish the Draft 
Action Plan for the period from April,2011 onwards for Persons with 
Disabilities on the Government web site. It is clearly understood that, it is a 
draft action plan and therefore, Statement Government will be at liberty to 
modify it and upon modification, when the final action plan is formulated, such 
final plan shall also be displayed on the web site  ASN 10 WP-3494andors..sxw  
14 It is stated that District Social Welfare officers in each District have the 
Maharashtra State Welfare of Persons with Disabilities  Action Plan, 2001. It 
will be open to the concerned persons to approach the said Officer for getting 
a copy of the said Action Plan. 15 One of the grievances is that by Government 
Resolution dated 13th February, 2008 the Technical Education Department has 
instructed all the technical institutions not to recruit a person who is 
totally blind in higher technical education. The State Government shall look 
into the matter and will take necessary remedial measures and submit a report 
within eight weeks from today.   16 A suggestion has been made to amend the 
format of the Annual Confidential Report of the Government employees and the 
public sector to include an item about the concerned employee's attitude 
towards persons with disabilities. The learned Advocate General states that the 
State  Government will consider this suggestion and indicate that steps taken 
within eight weeks from today.  17 The State Government shall within eight 
weeks from today publish compilation of the Statutory provisions, Government 
Notifications, Resolutions and Circulars regarding the persons with 
disabilities, whether they are in the matter of admission to educational 
institutions or for employment in Government service or any other  organization 
or in any other respect.  ASN 11 WP-3494andors..sxw 18 It was also discussed 
that most of the children who are deaf and dumb have some hearing defect since 
birth, which can be detected  within a week of their birth but because it is 
not detected in infancy, the  child does not learn how to speak. If the defect/ 
impairment is detected early, remedial measures can be adopted effectively. The 
learned Advocate General states that the Draft Action Plan, 2011 prepared by 
the State Government includes a provision of  requiring public hospitals to go 
for early detection of all disabilities so that remedial measures can be taken 
at the earliest. 19 The matters shall be listed for further hearing on 18th 
March, 2011 at 3.00 p. m. CHIEF JUSTICE S.J.VAZIFDAR, J. > Kanchan Pamnani> 
Advocate & Solicitor> 9, Suleman Chambers,> Battery Street, Colaba,> Mumbai - 
400 039.>  


     
Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of 
mobile phones / Tabs on:
http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

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

Reply via email to