Supreme Court awards Rs 1.25 crore to a CRPF constable medically invalidated after losing vision; Union failed to find him an alternate post

Summary

A CRPF constable (driver) was medically invalidated out of service after losing sight in one eye and suffering impaired vision in the other, and was given only Rs 15,000. The Single Judge ordered his reinstatement under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, and the Division Bench upheld it. The Supreme Court dismissed the Union's appeal but, since the respondent is now in his sixties, replaced reinstatement with a payment of Rs 1.25 crore.

The court's decision

The Court held that the employer cannot shelter behind the 'no work, no pay' principle, as the respondent's non-employment was the result of the Union's failure to provide an alternate post suited to his disability. Reinstatement was not possible, as he is a sexagenarian, so the Court modified the Single Judge's order and awarded Rs 1,25,00,000 inclusive of back wages, interest and costs, payable electronically within eight weeks. The Union's own calculation put his salary and allowances to superannuation at Rs 82,80,195. It also asked the State and District Legal Services Authorities to guide him on safe investment of part of the money and his future medical needs. The appeal was dismissed on these terms.

Provisions referred to

Section 47, Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995

Official source: Supreme Court of India. The PDF above is a copy from an open dataset of the court's public records.

This summary is prepared for general assistance only. It may contain errors and is not legal advice — rely on the full judgment.

Related judgments

Telangana High Court ·15 Sep 2026 ·Service Law

Telangana HC: Removal from service of an insurance officer, who was later honourably acquitted on the same allegations, is excessive and red

The question: Is the penalty of removal from service proportionate where the officer was honourably acquitted in a criminal trial on substantially the same charges?

An officer of National Insurance Company Limited was dismissed in 2002 after a departmental inquiry into medical-claim settlements, and the appellate authority upheld the penalty in 2016. He was later tried on substantially the same allegations in a corruption case and honourably acquitted. The High Court held that removal from service, after about 24 years of service, was unduly harsh and disproportionate.

Allowed WP/46784/2016

Supreme Court ·11 Aug 2026 ·Service Law

Supreme Court: Employee cannot be sacked for 'suppressing' a criminal case he did not know about; employers must follow a two-step enquiry

The question: Can an employee be terminated for suppressing criminal antecedents he was not aware of?

An employee of the Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. was terminated for giving false information about his criminal antecedents, after a non-cognizable police report under Sections 323 and 504 IPC turned up against him. The Supreme Court held that he genuinely did not know about the report, and that the employer had not properly considered whether the matter justified dismissal.

Appeal(s) allowed 2026 INSC 829