Frame policy for allowance to hearing impaired, says HC

CHANDIGARH: In a major embarrassment to the Punjab Government, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has virtually rapped it for discriminating between victims of disabilities and told it to frame a policy for granting conveyance allowance to the “deaf and dumb”.

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, January 18

In a major embarrassment to the Punjab Government, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has virtually rapped it for discriminating between victims of disabilities and told it to frame a policy for granting conveyance allowance to the “deaf and dumb”.

The direction by Justice Daya Chaudhary came on a petition by Madan Lal against the State of Punjab and other respondents. He was seeking the benefit of transport allowance as admissible to “blind and physically handicapped employees”.

Justice Chaudhary was told that the petitioner, working as centre head teacher at a school in Fazilka district, was 86 per cent “physically handicapped” and fell in the category of “deaf and dumb”.

Responding to his prayers, the counsel for the respondent-state submitted that the petitioner, being deaf and dumb, was not entitled for conveyance allowance.

His claim was not covered under relevant instructions dated June 15, 1982, relating to blind and orthopaedically challenged employees.

Taking up the matter, Justice Chaudhary asserted the Disabilities Act did not create a barrier or discriminated among persons with disabilities.

Referring to a judgment, Justice Chaudhary said a person having a disability mentioned in the Act, and certified by a medical doctor, was entitled to advantages of all the schemes and benefits provided by the government.

“There could not be further discrimination among persons with varied types of disabilities. In fact, there cannot be further discrimination between a person with disability of blindness and a person with disability of hearing impairment.

“Such discrimination has not been envisaged under the Act. All the categories of persons mentioned have their own disadvantages peculiar to themselves. A visually impaired person cannot be equated with a hearing impaired person and vice versa. Both have different type and mode of disability…

“The nature of disability of those categories of persons may not be the same, but the disabilities they suffer are to be addressed with care and compassion. The nature of disabilities may be different from person to person but they are categorised as a group of persons with disabilities”.

Justice Chaudhary added a policy has not been framed by the state government for grant of conveyance allowance to deaf and dumb employees whereas it was being given to other “physically handicapped persons”.

“Under the facts, the present petition is allowed and the respondent-state is directed to frame a policy for grant of conveyance allowance to deaf and dumb persons,” he added.

Before parting with the case, Justice Chaudhary set four-month deadline for the respondent-state for the completion of the “necessary exercise”.