Ravindra Babasaheb Shinde and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Bombay High Court; batch writ petitions; disability certificate re-verification; UDID card; RPwD Act 2016 ss.2(r), 2(s), 34, 56, 57, 59, 91, 102; RPwD Rules 2017 rr.17-20; Maharashtra State RPwD Rules 2024 r.8; Zilla Parishad teachers; benchmark disability 40%; hearing impairment; locomotor disability; BERA test; GR 16.06.2025; GR 09.10.2025; Swavlamban portal; fraud; moral turpitude; void ab initio; compulsory retirement; departmental enquiry; Article 14 non-arbitrariness; one-time medical re-assessment; special Medical Board; 120-day timeline; 50% suspension allowance; Section 91 fine one lakh rupees; followed Ravindra Kumar Sharma (2016) 4 SCC 791; followed Ram Prakash Kharlwa (Raj HC); applied Jagdish Balaram Bahira (2017) 8 SCC 670; relied on Shrilekha Vidyarthi (1991) 1 SCC 212 and Maneka Gandhi (1978) 1 SCC 248; partly allowed; quashed suspension orders.
What did the court decide?
All writ petitions partly allowed: punitive/consequential orders issued during the medical re-verification/re-assessment exercise (suspensions, stoppage of salaries, directions to register FIRs, cancellation of Approvals/Shalarth IDs, disciplinary orders, transfers) quashed and set aside, subject to a court-prescribed category-wise framework regulating post-reassessment action (exemption for superannuated/VRS employees; show-cause/charge-sheet/departmental enquiry ending in compulsory retirement for bogus-certificate holders and those reassessed at 0–10%; loss of PwD reservation benefits for those reassessed at 11–39%; 120-day completion timeline; apology-plus-voluntary-retirement exit route). One-time State-wide re-assessment approved only via specially constituted Medical Boards; Section 91 prosecution not approved for the present cohort but reserved for future cases; pending interim applications disposed of.