Employers with mental illness cannot be subject to discrimination in the matters of employment

Ukkash F | Sastra School of Law, Tamil Nadu | 15th May 2020

BHAVYA NAIN Vs HIGH COURT OF DELHI 

The Delhi HC declares a candidate fit for judicial service who has bipolar disorder. It was for the selection of judges under the Persons With Disability (PWD) category.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The petitioner, a law graduate applied for the DJS 2018 under the PwD category where two seats are reserved. The petitioner duly submitted all the documents as well as the Original Disability Certificate.  

The results announced whereby the candidature of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that his disability was not found to be permanent as per the Disability Certificate submitted by him since it is something which is likely to improve. Accordingly, the petitioner has preferred the present petition challenging the said notice.

ISSUE

1. Whether the petitioner who is certified to have been suffering from the mental illness i.e. BPAD which is in remission and is likely to improve, is entitled to the benefit of Reservation provided to PwD under the RPwD Act?

COURT’S OBSERVATION

The learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner submitted that while the Disability Certificate states that the petitioner’s mental illness is currently in remission, and that the said condition of the petitioner is likely to improve, the same does not lead to the conclusion that the mental illness is a “temporary” one i.e. the illness will get permanently cured at some point of time in the future. Mr. Nigam submits that the petitioner is a person with benchmark disability, suffering from Bipolar Affective Disorder, which is a long term mental illness, and in terms of the RPwD Act, the petitioner was issued a certificate of disability.

The counsel on the behalf of the respondents placed reliance on the case Harneet Kaur v. Baba Farid University of Health Science, BFUHS, Faridkot, wherein the Court held that,

“The RPwD Act cannot be extended to persons afflicted with temporary disabilities and has to be restricted to persons with permanent disabilities only. In this case, the petitioner was suffering from 40% disability which was temporary in nature”

The court, before giving its call decided to understand the nature of the mental illness of Bipolar disorder. The report which was given by the petitioner’s Doctor stated that 

“In this disease, the patient can commit suicide. When she came, she was aggressive and irritable. If the proper treatment is not given to the respondent then her aggressive nature can be prolonged. This disease is treatable but not curable. It is not a simple yes or no answer to the question whether the disease is curable or not. It is an episodic illness in which the patient is getting episodes of mental illness.”

Thus the court accepted the position of the mental illness to be lifelong and incurable and accepted her selection in the Delhi judicial service.

CONCLUSION

This judgment shows how much the judiciary of India is progressive in considering Mental illness to be a serious illness. The petitioner’s challenge was succeeded and her application under PWD category was applicable for judicial service without any further delay.