Another landmark judgement by Delhi High court... such judgements are required more and more to wake up Stubborn managements who misuse their vast resources for harassing PH employees aggrieved with their discriminatory policies instead of using these resources for their welfare... Salute to comrade V. Krishnamurthy... Also a moment of proud to have him as one of the secretaries of Visually Impaired Bank Employees Welfare Association!
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: V Krishnamurthy <[email protected]> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 14:59:06 +0800 Subject: Fw: KRISHNAMURTHY high court judgement CASE To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Rajesh Asudani <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> On Monday, 15 September 2014 7:57 AM, RAGHAVENDRAN R <[email protected]> wrote: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 4946/2013 and CM No.11173/2013 (stay) CANARA BANK ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gautam, Advocate versus V. KRISHNAMURTHY and ANR. ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Pankaj Sinha, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI O R D E R 02.09.2014 1. Pleadings are complete. 2. At the outset, counsel for the petitioner states that the respondent No.1 has filed WP (C)No.14017/2012 in the Madras High Court, wherein directions were sought to the petitioner/Bank (respondent in the aforesaid petition) to provide him study materials and to arrange a scribe at their cost and without any mark restriction to enable him, who is a person with visual disability, to participate in the process of promotion to the MMG Scale-III. Further, the respondent No.1 had challenged the promotion policy of the petitioner/Bank dated 16.5.2012. A copy of the aforesaid writ W.P.(C) 4946/2013 Page No.1 of 3 petition has been enclosed with the rejoinder filed by the petitioner/Bank and marked as Annexure P-10. 3. The Court is informed by the counsel for the petitioner/Bank that the respondent No.1 was promoted to the MMG Scale-III on 27.5.2014 and thus, the said relief does not survive. 4. As regards the remaining reliefs, since the aforesaid writ petition is pending before the Madras High Court and the respondent No.1, who is visually challenged and a permanent resident of Coimbatore, is appearing through counsel in the said proceedings, this Court is of the opinion that great inconvenience will be caused to him if he has to continue defending the present petition filed by the Bank from such a long distance. The petitioner being a nationalized bank has enough wherewithal, apart from a well organized legal department to pursue litigations all over the country, including the Madras High Court. 5. For the Bank to file the present petition in this Court only on the ground that the impugned order dated 2.5.2013 was passed by the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, whose office is situated in Delhi, cannot be the sole consideration that will weigh with the Court while examining the aspect of territorial jurisdiction. The doctrine of forum convenience gains significance when the respondent W.P.(C) 4946/2013 Page No.2 of 3 No.1, who is visually challenged, is admittedly a resident of Coimbatore and working for gain in a Branch of the petitioner/Bank situated in the very same city. Further, having regard to the fact that the respondent No.1 has already approached the Madras High Court for appropriate relief in WP(C)No.14017/2012, which is being contested by the petitioner/Bank and is pending adjudication in the said court, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the present petition with liberty granted to the petitioner/Bank to file appropriate proceedings in the Madras High Court. 6. In view of the fact that an interim order dated 5.8.2014 is operating in favour of the petitioner/Bank, it is directed that the said order shall remain in operation for a period of four weeks from today, which is considered sufficient time for the petitioner/Bank to approach the Madras High Court for relief. 7. The writ petition is disposed of, along with the pending application. HIMA KOHLI, J SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 sk/mk W.P.(C) 4946/2013 Page No.3 of 3 4 -- Thanks and regards Himanshu Sahu Reach: 09051055000 Skype: himanshu.cute4u 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 Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
