CHENNAI: Can a public authority deny employment to a candidate who is HIV-positive? 'No' is the emphatic answer of the Madras HC.
Justice K Chandru, flaying two state transport corporation (STC) managements for their "pedestrian understanding of AIDS and HIV" leading to denial of employment to two driver-aspirants who tested positive during the medical test, said: "The action of the state-owned transport corporations in driving the candidates to test for HIV itself was totally repugnant to the national policy. Their further attempt to deny employment to them is again not only unwarranted but also contrary to the dictum laid down by various courts and the policy of the Union of India."
The matter relates to two candidates — identified merely as 'Mr X' and 'Mr Y' — who were sponsored by the employment exchange for driver posts. While Mr Y had passed plus two, Mr X had served in the Army for eight years.
In October 2009 and November 2009, they were considered for appointment and sent to panel doctors for the medical fitness certificate. After their blood samples tested HIV positive, the doctors said they were 'unfit' for appointment as drivers.
Interestingly, the blood test was not conducted in any specialized laboratory; neither was it done with the consent of the candidates. Also, no prior information or pre-test and post-test counselling was provided by the laboratory. Without heeding to requests, the doctors forwarded the 'report' to the transport corporations with findings that they were unfit for employment.
Justice Chandru, expressing shock at the "layman apprehension" of the authorities, dubbed the incident unfortunate. He said the issue had already been answered by court decisions all over the world, including the SC.
Justice K Chandru, flaying two state transport corporation (STC) managements for their "pedestrian understanding of AIDS and HIV" leading to denial of employment to two driver-aspirants who tested positive during the medical test, said: "The action of the state-owned transport corporations in driving the candidates to test for HIV itself was totally repugnant to the national policy. Their further attempt to deny employment to them is again not only unwarranted but also contrary to the dictum laid down by various courts and the policy of the Union of India."
The matter relates to two candidates — identified merely as 'Mr X' and 'Mr Y' — who were sponsored by the employment exchange for driver posts. While Mr Y had passed plus two, Mr X had served in the Army for eight years.
In October 2009 and November 2009, they were considered for appointment and sent to panel doctors for the medical fitness certificate. After their blood samples tested HIV positive, the doctors said they were 'unfit' for appointment as drivers.
Interestingly, the blood test was not conducted in any specialized laboratory; neither was it done with the consent of the candidates. Also, no prior information or pre-test and post-test counselling was provided by the laboratory. Without heeding to requests, the doctors forwarded the 'report' to the transport corporations with findings that they were unfit for employment.
Justice Chandru, expressing shock at the "layman apprehension" of the authorities, dubbed the incident unfortunate. He said the issue had already been answered by court decisions all over the world, including the SC.
No comments:
Post a Comment