Vinod Tambe Case Judgements
-
Upload
disability-rights-alliance -
Category
Documents
-
view
10 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Vinod Tambe Case Judgements
-
Bomb
ay H
igh C
ourt
gopi wp-3365-13.sxw
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATBOMBAYAPPELLATECIVILJURISDICTION
WRITPETITIONNO.3365OF2013
ShriVinodShahajiTambe ..PetitionerVs.
TheUnionofIndia&Anr. ...Respondents
Mr.M.S.Karnik,forthepetitioner.Mr.S.M.PatilforrespondentNo.2.
CORAM:MOHITS.SHAH,C.J.&M.S.SANKLECHA,J.
DATE:12July2013P.C.
LeavetoaddtheCentralCoordinationCommitteeestablished
under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of
RightsandFullParticipation)Act,1995(hereinafterreferredtoasthe
DisabilitiesAct)andStateCoordinationCommittee establishedunder
thesameAct.
2. Learnedcounselforthepetitionersubmitsthatthepetitioner
wasdiagnosedtobesufferingwithbloodcancerin1977andwastreated
attheTataMemorialHospital,Mumbai. Thepetitionerwasdeclaredas
CancerCuredHandicap(PHPCO)aspercertificatedated16March2005.
Thelearnedcounselhasrelieduponthecirculardated21November1983
issued by the Director of Employment Exchange of the State of
Maharashtrainstructingall theDistrictEmploymentOfficerstoregister
thecancercuredpersonsashandicappedpersons. Thelearnedcounsel
submitsthatitisthusthepolicyoftheStatetorecognizethecancercured
persons as handicappedpersons. But the State Government has now
adoptedthestandthatinviewoftheenactmentoftheDisabilities Act,
theCircularstandssupersededandthatthedefinitionofdisabilitiesinthe
Disabilities Act,. 1995does not cover the petitioner's case. It is even
submittedintheaffidavitfiledbytheStateGovernmentthatdefinitionof
1 of 5::: Downloaded on - 02/07/2015 13:25:36 :::
-
Bomb
ay H
igh C
ourt
gopi wp-3365-13.sxw
disabilityenshrinedintheAmendmentBill,2012alsodoesnotcover
thedisabilitysufferedbythepetitionerand,therefore,alsothepetitioner
isnotentitledtoseekanyreliefasprayedinthepetition. Thelearned
counsel states that the copy of the Government Resolution dated 24
October1983referredtointheaforesaidCircularcouldnotbeobtained
bythepetitioner.
3. Learned counsel submits that the respondent authorities
erredinapplyingverynarrowdefinitionofthetermdisability.Learned
counselsubmitsthatdisabilityhasbeendefinedunderSection2(i)ofthe
Actasunder:
(i)disabilitymeans
(i)blindness;
(ii) lowvision;
(iii) leprosycured;
(iv) hearingimpairment;
(v) locomotordisability;
(vi) mentalretardation;
(vii) mentalillness.
ThelocomotordisabilityisdefinedinSection2(o)asunder:
(o)locomotordisabilitymeansdisabilityofthebones,jointsormusclesleadingtosubstantialrestrictionofthemovementofthelimbsoranyformofcerebralpalsy.
Learnedcounsel submits that apersonwhohassufferedbloodcancer
even after getting cured does suffer from disabilities arising from
weaknessofthebones,jointsormusclesleadingtosubstantialrestriction
ofthemovementofthelimbsand,therefore,thepetitionerissuffering
fromlocomotordisabilityasindicatedabove.
2 of 5::: Downloaded on - 02/07/2015 13:25:36 :::
-
Bomb
ay H
igh C
ourt
gopi wp-3365-13.sxw
4. Learnedcounselfurthersubmitsthattherearevariousother
forms of disabilities which would be covered by the definition of
disabilityundertheDisabilitiesAct,1995 aswellasRightofPersons
withDisabilitiesBill,2012,butbecauseofthenarrowinterpretationbeing
placedbytherespondentauthoritiesonthedefinitions,largenumberof
personsaredeprivedofthebenefitswhichwouldotherwisebeavailable
tothem.
Forinstance,thereisadiseasecalledHunter'sSyndrome.
Hunter'sSyndromeisararegeneticdisorderthatoccurswhenanenzyme
the body needs is missing or not generated enough. This leads to
progressive damageaffecting mental development andorgan function.
Therefore,thoughsuchapatientmaybetreatedaspartiallycoveredby
thedefinitionofdisability becauseofhearing impairment ormental
retardationyetwherethehearingdisabilitymaybeassessedatlessthan
40degreeandmentalretardationisalsoseparatelyassessedatlessthan
40 degree, the cumulative effect of hearing impairment and mental
retardationisnottakenintoaccountwhichwouldenablesuchaperson
toqualify tobetreatedas disabled. Thusonaccountof thenarrow
interpretationbeingplacedbytheauthorities,suchpersonsdonotfall
withinthedefinitionofpersonswithdisability.
5. Learnedcounselhasinvitedourattentiontotheprovisions
oftheRightofPersonswithDisabilitiesBill,2012particularlydefinitions
ofdisabilityinclausesx,yandzofSection2oftheBill,whichread
asunder:
(x)'personwithbenchmarkdisability'meansapersonwithnotlessthanfortypercentofaspecifieddisability,ascertifiedbyacompetentauthority;(y) 'person with disability' means a person with long termphysical,mental, intellectual orsensory impairmentwhich, ininteraction with various barriers, may hinder his full andeffectiveparticipationinsocietyonanequalbasiswithothers;(z) 'personwithdisability havinghis support needs' meansa
3 of 5::: Downloaded on - 02/07/2015 13:25:36 :::
-
Bomb
ay H
igh C
ourt
gopi wp-3365-13.sxw
personwithbenchmarkdisabilitywhoiscertifiedundersection44torequire highsupportonanongoingbasis, andmay, inparticular,includesuchpersonsconfinedtotheirhomesorlivingin institutions, or who may be concealed, neglected orsegregated,ordestituteorhomeless.
ClauseshhofSection2oftheBill,readsasunder:
hh.'specifieddisability'means
i) autismspectrumdisorder;
ii) blindness;
iii) cerebralpalsy;
iv) chronicneurologicalconditions;
v) deafblindness;
vi) hemophilia;
vii) hearingimpairment;
viii) intellectualdisability;
ix) leprosycured;
x) locomotordisability;
xi) lowvision;
xii) mentalillness;
xiii) musculardystrophy;
xiv) multiplesclerosis;
xv) specificlearningdisability;
xvi) speechandlanguagedisability,and
xvii) thalassemia;
xviii) multipledisability;
asdefinedintheSchedule.
6. Learned counsel has also invited our attention to the
provisionsof Section8and16of theDisabilities Act, 1995which lay
down the functions of Central Coordination Committee and State
Coordination Committee particularly the function of facilitating the
4 of 5::: Downloaded on - 02/07/2015 13:25:36 :::
-
Bomb
ay H
igh C
ourt
gopi wp-3365-13.sxw
continuous evolution of a comprehensive policy towards solving the
problemsfacedbypersonswithdisabilitiesanddevelopingnationaland
Statepoliciestoaddressissuesfacedbypersonswithdisabilities,further
to advise the Central Government and State Government on the
formulationof policiesaswell asprogrammes, legislationandprojects
withrespecttodisability.
7. Inviewoftheabovesubmissions,noticetothenewlyadded
parties,returnableon7August2013. LearnedA.G.P.,waivesserviceof
noticeonStateCoordinationCommittee. Mr. Sethna, learnedcounsel
waives service of notice of Union of India and also of Central
CoordinationCommittee.
CHIEFJUSTICE
M.S.SANKLECHA,J.
5 of 5::: Downloaded on - 02/07/2015 13:25:36 :::
-
Bomb
ay H
igh C
ourt
ASN 1/1 WP-3365.sxw
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATBOMBAYCIVILAPPELLATEJURISDICTION
WRITPETITIONNO.3365OF2013
Shri.VinodS.Tambe. ...Petitioner.VS.
TheUnionofIndiaandanr. ...Respondents.
Mr.SachinGitei/byShri.M.S.KarnikforthePetitioner.Mr.A.M.SethnaandS.D.BhosaleforRespondentNo.1.
CORAM:MOHITS.SHAH,C.J.AND M.S.SANKLECHA,J.
07August2013
PC:
Time limit granted earlier for carrying out the
amendmentisextendedupto13August2013.
Standoverto27August2013.
CHIEFJUSTICE
M.S.SANKLECHA,J.
::: Downloaded on - 02/07/2015 13:26:54 :::
-
Bomb
ay H
igh C
ourt
upa WP-3365-13.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3365 OF 2013
Vinod Shahaji Tambe ).. Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India and another ).. Respondents
Mr. M.S. Karnik for the Petitioner.Mr.A.M. Sethna with Mr.S.D. Bhosale for Respondent No.1.Mr. Jaydeep Deo, AGP, for Respondent No.2.
CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & M.S. SANKLECHA, J.
DATE : 29 AUGUST 2013
P.C.
While adjourning the further hearing of this petition, in order
to enable the learned Counsel for the petitioner to make a representation to
the Union of India in the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment,
Department of Disability Affairs, we also expect the Central Co-ordination
Committee appointed under The Persons with Disabilities (Equal
Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 to
look into the petitioner's representation and to make such recommendations
as it may consider appropriate. It may be pointed out that besides the
petitioner's case like cancer cured patients, various other disabilities such
as children suffering from Hunter's Syndrome should also be considered by
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 02/07/2015 13:27:15 :::
-
Bomb
ay H
igh C
ourt
upa WP-3365-13.sxw
the Central Co-ordination Committee whether they should be treated as
disability within the meaning of the term "specified disability" in clause
(hh) of Section 2 in the definition as provided in the Right of Persons with
Disabilities Bill, 2012 which is under consideration. For this purpose,
copy of our order dated 12 July 2013 shall also be forwarded to the Central
Co-ordination Committee along with the representation to be made by the
petitioner through his learned Advocate.
2. Stand over to 1 October 2013.
CHIEF JUSTICE
M.S. SANKLECHA, J.
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 02/07/2015 13:27:15 :::