Knowledge Resource


Access India

Issues in Inclusion

Archives: Top Stories

Archives: News

Useful Links

Country Reports


Aids & Appliances


Braille Press

Events and Conferences

Employment Opportunities

Disability India Journal

Submit Your Research/ Article

Latest issue of the Journal

National Institutes







Instances when PWD Act not Applicable Retrospectively


Raj Narain Dubey vs. State of U.P and Ors

Filed under: Section 47 of Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 Army Pension Regulations, Army Pension Rules, 1972
Appellants: Raj Narain Dubey
Respondent: State of U.P and Ors
Citation: 2005(2) ESC 1424
Court: In the High Court of Allahabad (Lucknow Bench)
Judge: Devi Prasad Singh


Raj Narain Dubey was appointed to the post of Police Constable in the year 1971. Thereafter, he continued in service as a regular employee in the department. He appeared before a Medical Board at Lucknow on 22.01.1986. The Medical Board was of opinion that he was unfit to be retained in service as he was suffering from the ‘Motor Neuron disease involving all the fours limbs’. After receipt of the report from the Medical Board, Raj Narain’s services were dispensed with, with payment of disability pension. Against this decision, Raj Narain filed the present petition.

Arguments made on behalf of Raj Narain

Relying on Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, it was argued on behalf of Raj Narain that in view of the provisions of the Act, the order of dispensing with his services was flawed and it was the responsibility of the State to adjust Raj Narain on any alternative post.

Arguments made on behalf of the State

It was argued on behalf of the State that the Act would not cover the present controversy as it applied only to those cases, which took place after the Act had come into effect from the date the Central Government had issued a notification for its enforcement, which was 2.2.1996.

Observations of the Court

The Court opined that it was a settled law that an Act or Statute shall cover the field from the date of its notification unless it is provided otherwise in the Act itself. Reference was made to section of the Act, which showed that the Act came into force on the date Central Government may appoint by notification and the notification regarding the Persons with Disabilities Act was 2.2.1996. It was observed that therefore the provisions of the Act would be applicable to only to the dispute arisen after 2.2.1996 and not with retrospective effect.

Further, the Court looked into the argument made on behalf of Raj Narain that the order made by the department was arbitrary. It was held that once a competent Medical board had declared Raj Narain unfit after due medical examination and the authority has aken a decision to dispense wit his services, the Court cannot dwell into the controversy of his fitness and held that it will not decide with the decision of an expert body like the Medical Board.

With the direction that Raj Narain would be paid disability pension in accordance with the rules and the Writ Petition was dismissed.

Sections Referred:

  • Sections 1 & 47 of Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995

Cases Referred:

  • D.S Nakara and Ors. vs. Union of India, (1983) 1SCC 305

Acts in Disability

The Mental Health Act

The RCI Act

The PWD Act

The National Trust Act

National Policy for Persons with Disabilities

Disability and Law

Law, Courts and the Constitution of India

Disability Law and Access to Rights

Directory of Lawyers

Before you file a case

Disability and Litigation

Admission in Schools

Reservations in Jobs

Reservations in Higher Education

Allotment of Benefits

Accident Compensation

Legal Aid Cell

For free legal aid for persons with disabilities, their caregivers and service providers
Online Legal Aid Cell

Best viewed in Google Chrome version 6 and above, Opera 11.0 and Mozilla Firefox version 3 and above
© Society for Child Development, 1992