Sh. Madanjit Kumar vs Union Of India And Anr. on 22 November, 2016

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has a daughter

who has 100% profound mental retardation and also locomotor disability,

W.P.(C) No.7087/2016 Page 1 of 13
and hence the petitioner should not be transferred in view of the applicable

circulars of the Government of India being the circulars dated 15.2.1991 and

6.6.2014. Two more circulars have been issued by the Government of India

dated 17.11.2014 and 5.1.2016 whereby locomotor disability and mental

retardation have been added to the disabilities which would be subject

matter of the circulars dated 15.2.1991 and 6.6.2014.

3. On behalf of the respondent no.2/employer, it is argued by

placing reliance upon the circulars of the Government of India dated

25.1.1991 and 8.4.1991 read with the decision of the Board of Directors of

the respondent no.2 dated 21.11.2016 that the circulars of the Government

of India dated 15.2.1991 and 6.6.2014 do not ipso facto apply to the

respondent no.2 unless they have been adopted by the respondent no.2

because these circulars are in the nature of guidelines and not presidential

directives. It is stated by the respondent no.2 that detailed reasons have

been given by the Board of Directors of the respondent no.2 in its minutes

of meeting dated 21.11.2016 for not adopting the circular dated 6.6.2014

issued by the Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel,

Public Grievances and Pensions of the Government of India.

W.P.(C) No.7087/2016 Page 2 of 13

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply

*