Clear case of discrimination: Gujarat HC on CRPF denying promotion to HIV positive staffer
Ahmedabad, Feb 12 (PTI): The Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) denying a female staffer promotion to a higher post because she was infected with HIV-AIDS was a clear instance of discrimination, the Gujarat High Court noted on Wednesday.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi made the observation while hearing a plea filed by the woman staffer of the CRPF who said she was being denied promotion despite meeting other eligibility criteria because she was suffering from HIV-AIDS.
The court directed that the matter be brought to the notice of in-charge Additional Solicitor General of India and sought the law officer's appearance before it on the next date of hearing on March 6.
The counsel appearing for the respondents -- the Union of India, CRPF and Commandant, CRPF -- contended that a standing order was passed pursuant to the rule which stipulates that a candidate has to be in "shape one" for the purpose of promotion.
"This case highlights clear instances of discrimination in the Central Reserve Police Force for the incumbents who are suffering from the disease known as HIV-AIDS," the HC said in its order.
The counsel for the petitioner contended the woman has been denied promotion to higher posts consistently despite being fit for elevation on all other aspects of eligibility except the fact that she is suffering from the infectious disease which is progressing.
The petitioner challenged the validity of the Standing Order Number 4/2008 as well as Rule 5 of the CRPF Assistant Commandant (Ministerial), Recruitment Rules 2011, on the ground the same is contradictory to the provisions of HIV and AIDS (Prevention and Control) Act, 2017 and the National HIV Counselling and Testing Guidelines 2024.
They were also violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution as the petitioner was being denied promotion to a higher ministerial post only on the basis of a decision of the medical board dated February 3, 2024, reporting the petitioner was suffering from higher grade of the disease, the court noted in its order.
Articles 14, 16 and 21 deal with equality, equal opportunity in government employment to all citizens and prohibition of discrimination based on certain grounds like religion, race, caste, and right to life and personal liberty, respectively.
"The promotion, if any, made on the post in question, shall be subject to the final decision of the present petition," the bench maintained.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
IPL final shifted for bigger stadium, not ticket issue: Shivakumar
Bengaluru (PTI): Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar on Wednesday rubbished allegations that the IPL final venue was shifted from Bengaluru to Ahmedabad due to the distribution of tickets to MLAs.
Speaking to reporters, Shivakumar said the reason for the shift could be the availability of a larger stadium in Ahmedabad.
“Ahmedabad has a large stadium and can accommodate more spectators. That must be the reason the IPL final was shifted there. There is no connection between ticket distribution to MLAs and the venue change,” he said.
When asked about reports linking the venue shift to MLAs demanding tickets, he quipped, “In some places, 50 per cent of tickets are reserved.”
When reporters said the BCCI had indicated that the decision was linked to ticket issues, he responded, “Let them make such statements. I will respond appropriately.”
Bengaluru was originally expected to host the final as the Royal Challengers Bengaluru were the defending champions.
Ahmedabad will host the IPL final for a second successive season on May 31, the BCCI announced earlier in the day, while allotting Qualifier 1 to Dharamsala and two other playoff games to New Chandigarh.
The board, however, said the final venue was shifted “owing to certain requirements from the local association and authorities that were beyond the scope of BCCI’s established guidelines and protocols.”
Shivakumar declined to comment on the revocation of the suspension of Muslim leaders in Davanagere, saying it was a party decision.
Regarding the removal of MLC Naseer Ahmed as CM Siddaramaiah’s political secretary, he said the chief minister had already spoken on the matter.
“The CM has his own information. Party office-bearers have provided guidance. He was given certain responsibilities, which he did not handle properly, which is why he was removed,” Shivakumar said.
On MLC Abdul Jabbar, who resigned as the state Congress minority cell chief and was later expelled from the party, he said Jabbar had submitted his resignation, which the party accepted.
The Congress in Karnataka faced internal dissent in April when several Muslim leaders objected to the party fielding Samarth Shamanur as its candidate for the recently held Davanagere South Assembly bypoll.
They demanded that a Muslim candidate be fielded, citing the constituency’s substantial Muslim population. The party subsequently took disciplinary action against three leaders, including Jabbar and MLC Ahmed.
When asked about his and the CM’s visit to Delhi, he said, “We will go when the high command calls us. It is not appropriate to go without being called.”
On Congress supporting TVK in Tamil Nadu, Shivakumar said the decision was taken to keep the "BJP out of power and strengthen secular forces." Elections to the 234 Assembly constituencies were held on April 23, and the results were announced on May 4.
The Congress party, a long-time ally of the DMK, announced its support for TVK to form a government in Tamil Nadu and severed ties with the Dravidian major.
The incumbent DMK was trounced by the fledgling Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam, led by Vijay, who secured 108 seats. “Despite pressure from the AIADMK and BJP, TVK did not align with them. Our party has taken this decision in the interest of secular forces and the welfare of Tamil Nadu,” Shivakumar said.
