Partly allowed

Telangana State Road Transport Corporation v. G.Uma Devi

Telangana HC29 Nov 2016WA/1284/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ appeal, the High Court partly allowed the petition against the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation's rejection of a compassionate appointment. The Court held that conferring appointment benefits to women only in specific categories of posts is gender-biased and directed the appellant to consider the respondent for any post to which she is qualified.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was partly allowed; the Corporation was directed to consider the respondent for any post to which she is qualified and pass appropriate orders within four weeks.

Telangana State Road Transport Corporation… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN

¶2

AND

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. SHYAM PRASAD

¶4

WRIT APPEAL No. 1284 of 2016

¶5

JUDGMENT: (Per VRS,J)

¶6

Aggrieved by an order of the learned Judge, directing the grant of compassionate appointment to the wife of the deceased servant of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, the Corporation has come up with the above writ appeal.

¶7

Heard Mr. N. Vasudeva Reddy, learned counsel for the

¶8

appellants. Mr. V. Narasimha Goud, learned counsel, takes notice for the respondent.

¶9

Admittedly, the respondent’s husband worked as a Driver in the appellant Corporation from 1986 and he died in harness on 12.08.2011. She sought appointment on compassionate grounds, but she was found to be of the height of 144 centimeters. As per the scheme of compassionate appointment available under Circular No.PD-30/2000, dated 05.05.2000, compassionate appointments are made only to three categories of posts, namely, Driver Grade-II, Conductor Grade-II and Shramik. Under the said scheme, lady dependents are considered only for appointment to the post of

¶10

VRS,J & GSP,J WA No.1284 of 2016

¶11

¶12

Conductor and not for the post of Shramik, in view of the nature of work involved in the said post.

¶13

Since the normal height prescribed for Conductor Grade-II is 153 centimeters, several lady dependents could not get appointment on compassionate grounds, forcing the Corporation to grant a relaxation up to 7 centimeters. In other words, lady dependents of employees, who died in harness, were considered eligible, if they were of a height of 146 centimeters, provided the death had occurred on or before 04.11.2000. In this case, the death occurred on 12.08.2011, in addition to which, the respondent did not even have 146 centimeters of height. Though the Departmental Committee recommended further relaxation, the competent Authority rejected the same, forcing the respondent to move a writ petition.

¶14

As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants, even if the cut off date, namely, 04.11.2000, is rejected, the relaxation that could be given to a lady dependent so as to become a Conductor Grade-II, could only be 7 centimeters. There cannot be a further relaxation up to 2 centimeters. Therefore, the claim of the respondent, accepted by the learned Judge, for appointment to the post of Conductor Grade-II, cannot be sustained.

¶15

VRS,J & GSP,J WA No.1284 of 2016

¶16

¶17

However, the stand taken by the appellant Corporation that such women employees cannot be considered for any other post including the post of Shramik, does not appear to be in consonance with the constitutional goal. India is a party to the Convention for Elimination of Discrimination against Women. It was only in pursuance of the said Convention that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was enacted by the Parliament. There cannot be any discrimination at work places on the basis of gender. To confine the benefits of a scheme for compassionate appointment to three categories of posts, may be perfectly legal. But, to confine the benefits of such a scheme to women employees, only to one category of those three categories of posts, will be gender biased. Therefore, the appellant Corporation, being a Public Sector Undertaking, cannot afford to be gender biased. Hence, the appellants are obliged to consider the case of the respondent to any post to which she is qualified.

¶18

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is partly allowed, modifying the order of the learned Judge and directing the appellants to consider the case of the respondent to any post to which she is qualified and pass appropriate orders within a period of four (4) weeks.

¶19

VRS,J & GSP,J WA No.1284 of 2016

¶20

¶21

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any pending in the

¶22

writ appeal shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶23

__________________________ V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J

¶24

_____________________ G. SHYAM PRASAD, J 29^th November, 2016 cbs

¶25

VRS,J & GSP,J WA No.1284 of 2016

¶26

¶27

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN √ AND

¶28

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. SHYAM PRASAD

¶29

Writ Appeal No.1284 of 2016 (Per VRS,J)

¶30

29^th November, 2016

¶31

cbs

Telangana State Road Transport Corporation v. G.Uma Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Telangana State Road Transport Corporation v. G.Uma Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Sai Santosh Reddy Voriganti Vs The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary

Mr. Advaith Bhokray, Vs The Union of India

Ms. Kethinedi Gnapika, Vs The Union of India

R.Ilamma, Vs The State of Telangana

M/s S.N. Construction and Developers, Vs State Bank of India

P.Shankar, Vs Bank of Baroda