Employees Who Acquire Disability During Service Entitled To PH Quota Promotion: Punjab & Haryana High Court

A petition was filed by an employee who was denied promotion by the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd (PSPCL) on the ground that his disability occurred after his initial appointment, and not at the time of joining service.

A Bench of Justice Harpreet Singh Brar held, “Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1955 and Section 20 of the RPWD Act, 2016 (Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016) expressly state that no establishment shall dispense with, or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during his service and that no promotion shall be denied to a person merely on the ground of his disability. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly held that the Employer cannot draw a distinction between employees who entered service under the PH category and those who acquired disability in the course of service especially in the matters of promotion.”

The High Court relied on the precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which has previously ruled that employers must not distinguish between employees who joined the service under the PH category and those who became disabled during service, especially in matters concerning promotion. Justice Brar stressed that such a distinction is discriminatory and contrary to the intent of the disability rights legislation.

In further support of its decision, the Court cited the 2025 judgment in C.H. Joseph v. The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. The ruling in that case affirmed that the benefit of reservation in promotions for persons with disabilities must not be restricted only to those who were initially recruited under the PH quota. It applies equally to employees who acquire a disability during the course of their employment.

It said, “A humane approach is imperative in such cases, for an employee who acquires a disability during the course of service is entitled to protection under Section 47 of the 1995 Act or, as the case may be, under Section 20 of the RPwD Act, 2016.”

The Court said that employees who suffer a disability during their tenure deserve the full protection offered by the law. Denying them benefits available under the PH category would amount to injustice and disregard of the legislative intent behind the disability rights framework.

The petitioner in this case had sought promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) under the PH quota. He claimed that his juniors had been promoted on July 16, 2023, under the PH category, while he was unjustly excluded despite being eligible. The respondents had informed him that the issue of whether employees who acquire disabilities during service are entitled to reservation benefits was still under consideration by the State Government and that his promotion would be reviewed after receiving clarification.

However, the Court dismissed this reasoning, stating, “Section 47 of the 1995 Act and Section 20 of the RPWD Act, 2016 expressly state that no establishment shall dispense with, or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during his service and that no promotion shall be denied to a person merely on the ground of his disability."

The respondent authority had further argued that the petitioner had not formally applied for promotion under the PH category. The Court rejected this contention, pointing out that the petitioner had submitted multiple representations seeking promotion benefits. These representations clearly reflected his intent and eligibility. Despite this, the authorities failed to consider his case, even though promotions under the PH category were extended to his juniors.

The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, stating that the authorities had not questioned his suitability for promotion. Therefore, the denial of promotion was unjustified. The High Court directed, "Indubitably, the Respondents have made no denial regarding the suitability of the petitioner for the promotion. Accordingly, the Respondents are directed to grant the Petitioner promotion under the PH category, along with all consequential benefits, from 16.07.2023, i.e., the date on which the juniors of the petitioners were promoted under the PH category within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order."

Cause Title: Jaswinder Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors., [2025:PHHC:110193]

Appearances:

Petitioner: Senior Advocate Pawan Kumar, with Advocate Vidushi Kumar

Respondents: Advocates Bhanu Pratap Singh, Arundhati Kulshreshtha