A 999 operator is suing his bosses after claiming he suffered panic attacks because he didn't have his own desk.

Nathan Roberts, 28, says he was forced to quit because he could not cope with sharing a desk with colleagues.

The father-of-two says he suffers from a 'social anxiety disorder' and should have had a desk specially reserved for him on his arrival at work.

Instead, he claims the ambulance service had a 'hot desking' policy in place which meant desk allocation was a free for all.

Mr Roberts has been given the go ahead by an appeal court judge to take legal action against North West Ambulance Service in Manchester under disability discrimination laws.

If he wins he could receive a pay-out of up to £500,000 - paid for by the taxpayer.

Mr Roberts, of Middleton, Manchester, said the policy of 'hot desking' caused him severe anxiety and stress.

He said: 'With my condition, panic attacks can be triggered by any number of things, including the amount of people in the vicinity, or your environment.

'In that particular seat, my back was to the wall and there was a little window. I could sit there and do my job without fear of anxiety or a panic attack. This was a provision to keep me in the job.

'If employers can't resolve a small issue like this to keep me in the job, then what about people with other disabilities?'

The North West Air Ambulance control Centre in Belle Vue, Manchester, where Nathan Roberts worked

Mr Roberts had been hired as an emergency medical dispatcher in January 2008 to field 999 and non-emergency calls.

At his job interview he disclosed his psychiatric condition which made him disabled in law and was sent to work in a control room with other medical dispatchers.

There were 24 work stations in the room but due to shift patterns operators were given 'hot-desks' and took any available work station when they arrived for work in Belle Vue, Manchester.

After being forced to take time off work for anxiety Mr Roberts asked to sit in a 'less prominent' desk at the back wall next to a window.

And the following year his bosses wrote a letter to managers asking them to ensure Mr Roberts was allowed to sit at that desk and if necessary to reserve it for his arrival.

But the desk was not always available and in August 2009 an agreement was reached that a reserved sign should be put on the desk.

However, no reserved sign was ever put on the desk because it was deemed 'impractical' due to complicated shift patterns which often meant all seats being used when staff shifts overlapped.

Supervisors tried to make the seat available and colleagues using it sometimes had to be moved.

On New Year's Eve 2009 a trainer and two people sitting in adjoining seats had to be moved and Mr Roberts wrote a letter of resignation that night.

Mr Robert's case of constructive dismissal and disability discrimination were initially rejected at an employment hearing in 2010 on the grounds the ambulance service had not applied the hot desk policy to him.

Bosses said Mr Roberts was not required to sit in anywhere other than his preferred seat and was not put at a disadvantage by such a provision.

But Judge David Richardson sitting at an appeal tribunal in London with two colleagues allowed the appeal.

He said Mr Roberts was affected by 'hot desking' because colleagues were still sitting in and intending to use his preferred seat when he arrived for work.

He said: 'It is, we think, arguable that the practice of 'hot desking' placed the claimant at a substantial disadvantage in comparison with persons who are not disabled.'

The North West Ambulance Service said it could not comment until the Employment Tribunal made its final decision.

A hearing will be arranged at a later date.