What not to do: A case in point from Madhya Pradesh

Shri Bihari Lal Thevait, a resident of District Bilaspur, Madhya Pradesh sent a petition to the Commission wherein he said that he was a 26-year old man whose lower limbs had not been affected by polio. He also suffered from a cardiac problem. He had approached the District Collector for assistance and employment. Although the District Collector arranged for his operation at a private hospital, free of cost, the operation was not successful and even after four to five years he was not cured. He alleged that the operation was suggested instead of providing him with a tricycle. The then District Collector also provided him with assistance at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month and this continued until such time as that Collector was in office. The Collector also passed an order for his appointment as an Assistant Teacher. However, this did not materialise. He, therefore, sought compensation of Rupees Fifty lakhs for violation of his fundamental rights, treatment of his heart ailment, management of his disability and employment as an Assistant Teacher.

Though the Commission does not normally take action on petitions, which relate essential to service matters, the Commission in this case issued a notice to the Collector and called for a report as the petitioner was a disabled person. The Collector responded saying that the complainant was affected by polio when he was one-and-a-half years old and that both his feet were deformed. The opinion of Orthopedic Doctors was sought, and they had certified that the complainant would have to move on hands and knees, in a crawling position, unless he was operated upon. Accordingly, he was operated upon in 1988 and his limb deformity was corrected to a large extent. In five months time, he was fitted with calipers and a walking frame to help him stand erect. The Collector also stated that the complainant was entitled to be considered for a job under the quota for persons with disabilities. According to the Collector, the complainant had tried to obtain a certificate of complete recovery to enable him to get the job of an Assistant Teacher. He was advised to obtain a disability certificate from the competent authority. The petitioner apparently made the complaint as he was aggrieved by this advice. The report of the Collector was sent to the complainant for his comments. However, the petitioner stood by his complaint and stated that the operation, which was performed, was not successful and his defect was not cured even after four years. The complainant claimed Rupees Twenty lakhs as compensation for mental and physical torture he had undergone and Rupees Thirty lakhs for protection of his rights and for his living.

The Commission considered the matter carefully and expressed appreciation of the action taken by the District Collector. The question whether the condition of the petitioner worsened after the operation, as claimed by him, was not probed further. However, the Commission felt that the State Government, in a Welfare State, should help alleviate the suffering of such disabled persons. Accordingly, the following recommendations were made by the Commission to the State of Madhya Pradesh:

1. To grant ex-gratia monetary relief to the tune of Rupees One lakh to the petitioner, either from the fund established by the State Government for the welfare of the handicapped persons, or from the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund.
2. To offer a job to the petitioner commensurate with his academic qualifications and physical ability, in accordance with the provisions of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, or on compassionate grounds.

The State Government intimated the Commission that it paid a sum of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation to the petitioner.

Source: From the website of the National Human Rights Commission: www.nhrc.nic.in