Bombay High Court Upholds State's Power To Re-Verify Disability Certificates Of Govt Employees; Says Fake Claims Amount To Moral Turpitude
In what could impact thousands of public servants in various departments across Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court has upheld the powers of the State Government to order 're-assessment' and 'verification' of the medical certificates and the Unique Disability ID (UDID) cards.A division bench of Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Abhay Mantri has held that obtaining a government job on the basis...
In what could impact thousands of public servants in various departments across Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court has upheld the powers of the State Government to order 're-assessment' and 'verification' of the medical certificates and the Unique Disability ID (UDID) cards.
A division bench of Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Abhay Mantri has held that obtaining a government job on the basis of a bogus UDID card, would amount to an 'immoral act' and such an employee can be removed from service on the ground of 'moral turpitude.'
It noted that several fraudulent activities of employees in various departments were being noticed especially by those, who were already in service and then claimed to have acquired disability. The judges noted that majority of the employees obtained the benefits under the category of 'hearing impairment' and on being subjected to medical reassessment, 80 per cent of the employees, subjected, were found to be with 0 per cent disability.
"When such frauds are noticed in most of the cases post re-verification, it becomes glaring that there surely is a serious problem of bogus UDIDs, who have taken employment on the basis of exaggerated percentages of disabilities or have entered employment as able bodied persons and then acquired disabilities, the most common being 'hearing impairment'. The State Government has noticed this to be deep rooted, in practically every district in the State. With lakhs of employees engaged in Government/Semi-Government/Local Authorities/State Instrumentalities, it is most difficult to pinpoint a particular case of fraud, without a medical re-examination," the bench observed in the May 6 order.
The bench noted that the reassessment reports indicated that some of the employees subjected to examination, admitted that they do not have hearing impairment. Some tried to influence or manipulate the authorities and some tried to exert undue pressure and some even threatened the officials of the Institute. Some even tried to dodge the tests.
"We are of the view that those candidates whose medical certificates or the UDID card suffer from procedural deficiencies or are acquired by nefarious means, would amount to moral turpitude on their part. Acquiring bogus certificates or manipulating authorities to acquire a disability certificate or UDID card so as to facilitate selection or become entitled to certain service PwD benefits, would amount to an immoral act. Moral turpitude is a conduct that is inherently base, vile, depraved, or contrary to accepted moral standards of the society. It implies something done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals," the judges held.
In the 147-page judgment authored by Justice Ghuge, the bench referred to the orders of the Supreme Court which has described moral turpitude as an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which a person owes to fellow human beings or to society in general. If any person has fraudulently obtained a disability certificate, thereby securing public employment otherwise meant for genuine persons with disabilities, and enjoying statutory benefits funded by the public exchequer for years, would squarely fall within the definition of moral turpitude.
"Misconduct involving moral turpitude can justify dismissal or removal from service even for a first offence. It disentitles an employee from leniency in punishment. The gravity of the misconduct itself warrants the severest punishment. Courts have consistently held that offences such as misappropriation, fraud, fabrication of records, and bribery, fall squarely within the ambit of moral turpitude. Service length, family circumstances, or being on the verge of retirement, are not mitigating factors, when the foundational act of acquiring an appointment is a result of playing a fraud. An employee guilty of moral turpitude cannot claim protection under service rules or equitable doctrines, and compassion has no place where the initial act itself was vile and calculated," the bench remarked.
The procurement of bogus disability certificates is not merely a procedural violation, it is an inherently dishonest conduct directed at defrauding the State, depriving genuine persons with disabilities of their rightful entitlements, and enriching oneself through deliberate deception at the expense of a vulnerable class. These persons do not merely commit a procedural irregularity, the bench observed.
While agreeing with the submissions of Additional Government Pleader Priyabhushan Kakade, the judges noted that the purpose of the State Policy is to eliminate bogus/non-genuine disability certificates so that genuine persons with disabilities can receive benefits that rightfully accrue to them.
AGP Kakade also submitted that those employees who have acquired medical reports with exaggerated disability percentages, have become jittery and are fearful of the possibility of being exposed. He highlighted that the "most sought after" physical infirmity is 'hearing impairment' citing the example of the Nashik and Satara, as 80 per cent of the employees (before the court) have 'hearing impairment' certificates and 'locomotor disability', respectively.
Kakade also pointed out that more than 90 per cent of such employees, have acquired the disability after recruitment, only after the State introduced special benefits for Persons with Disabilities and also the fact that more than 80 per cent of those medically re-examined, were reported to have 0 per cent disability or their disability which was earlier shown to be in between 40per cent to 80per cent, conspicuously fell in between 6 per cent to 20 per cent.
"In fact, logically, if a disability is truly long term as defined in Section 2(s) of the Act, it should remain the same or increase with age. It cannot decrease. A drastic reduction in the disability percentage usually means either that the original disability was temporary or that the earlier certificate was obtained by adopting improper means. Reassessment is, therefore, the only reliable way to uncover fraudulent disability claims because it goes beyond checking documents and directly examines the person's current, real medical condition. Fraud in disability benefits usually happens at the certification stage when a person misrepresents impairment, exaggerates symptoms, or uses influence or false documentation, to obtain a certificate," the bench observed.
Therefore, the judges issued a slew of directives for the employees, who have either secured a job on the basis of UDID or disability cards, or have acquired disability during the course of their employment. The bench made it clear that employees who have superannuated or have opted for voluntary retirement, should not be subjected to a medical re-examination/re- verification or a punitive action. They shall be entitled for all retirement benefits, if there is no other impediment.
"Employees, notwithstanding the length of service of any such candidate, found to have acquired bogus medical certificates and/or bogus UDID cards, after the medical re-assessment/re- verification exercise, they shall be issued with show-cause notices with 15 days notice period to tender their written say/statement. If their replies are found to be unsatisfactory, the Employer shall issue them a charge sheet and conduct a departmental enquiry and if the charges are proved, pass an order of compulsory retirement from service," the bench ordered.
Employees whose disability percentage has fallen below 40 per cent upto 11 per cent after the medical re-verification, would be deprived of Persons with Disability (PwD) reservation service benefits made available on the basis of any Government Resolution issued from time to time.
"Employees, whose disability percentage has fallen between 0 per cent to 10 per cent, after the medical re-verification exercise, shall be issued with show-cause notices with liberty to file their reply within 15 days. If their replies are found to be unsatisfactory, the Employer shall issue them a charge sheet and conduct a departmental enquiry and if the charges are proved, pass an order of compulsory retirement from service," the judges ordered.
The judges made it clear that none of the employees, shall refuse to undergo the medical re-examination as mandated by the State and if one refuses, then s/he shall be given a second chance within 21 days and if the said employee refuses even on the second chance, it shall be deemed that s/he desires to avoid the examination and such employee shall then be placed under suspension until s/he undergoes the examination.
"During such suspension, he/she shall be entitled for only 50 per cent basic salary as suspension allowance until the suspension lasts. If s/he is adamant and does not undergo the medical re-examination and prefers to continue under suspension till superannuation, s/he shall be entitled for only 50 per cent of all retirement dues/pension/gratuity, etc. If any Employee, falling in the above categories, desires to avoid any disciplinary action, s/he shall file an apology affidavit with an application for voluntary retirement, provided s/he is eligible for pensionary benefits, and quit employment with all retirement dues, the Employer may accept such application within 15 days of it's submission. If any Employer desires to reject such apology and the application for voluntary retirement, a reasoned order shall be passed within 15 days, failing which, it shall be deemed to have been accepted," the bench ordered.
The fear of 'black sheep' manipulating the medical certificates or UDID cards for facilitating their appointment, cannot be ruled out, even in future, the judges said, and therefore directed that, in future, any candidate who applies for a post reserved for a PwD or an in-service candidate claims to have acquired any disability, each such case shall be subjected to the rigours of the exercise as is provided under the Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2016, the 2017 Rules thereunder.
As regards the doctors, who would have issued bogus certificates, the bench ordered, "We also make it clear that in any such a re-verification exercise, the role of any Doctor involved in the issuance of a bogus medical certificate or UDID card or exaggeration in the disability percentage, is noticed, if the said Doctor is in service, he/she shall be subjected to disciplinary action. The case of such a Doctor shall be referred to the concerned department Head under the letter of the employer/Zilla Parishad/Head of the Education Department of a Corporation etc. for disciplinary action. If such a doctor has superannuated, an FIR shall be registered against him/her."
With these observations, the judges disposed of the plea.
Case Title: Santosh Hiraman Lashkare vs State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition 4325 of 2026)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 247