Chattisgarh High Court
Vijay K. Deshmukh vs Chhattisgarh Public Service ... on 23 September, 2022
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
WPPIL No. 120 of 2022
Vijay K. Deshmukh Versus Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission & Others
23/09/2022 Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Rungta, learned senior counsel,
assisted by Mr. Pawan K. Sahu, learned counsel, appearing for the
petitioner. Also heard Mr. Anand Mohan Tiwari, learned counsel,
appearing for the respondent No. 1, Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande,
learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 2, Mr. Amit Tirkey, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 3, Mr. T.K.Tiwari, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 4, Mr. Jitendra Pali, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the respondent No. 5 and 11, Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned Deputy Solicitor General, appearing for the respondents No. 6, 7, 9 and 12, Mr. Vaibhav Dhar Diwan, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 10, as well as Mr. B.S.Rajput, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 8.
By filing this public interest litigation, the petitioner alleges violation of the guidelines dated 29.08.2018 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (Divyangjan), in the matter of conducting written examination for 2 persons with benchmark disabilities in connection with providing of scribe to the persons with blindness and locomotor disabilities.
It is submitted by Mr. Rungta that an advertisement was issued on 08.06.2022 for filling 80 posts of Peon in the General Administration Department of the Mantralaya. In connection with the examination for the aforesaid post to be held on 25.09.2022 pursuant to the said advertisement, a notice dated 12.08.2022 was issued in connection with eligibility of the scribe. It is submitted that the aforesaid notice dated 12.08.2022 is against the guidelines dated 29.08.2018.
Though the examination is being held on 25.09.2022, Mr. Rungta submits that the writ petition ought to be entertained and adjudicated so that grievance of the people with blindness and locomotor disabilities are redressed and they do not suffer any prejudice at the time of taking examination in future.
We have perused the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vikas Kumar v. Union Public Service Commission , reported in (2021) 5 SCC 370.
The argument of Mr. Rungta has substance and the matter requires early resolution.
Accordingly, we direct the Registry to list this case on 02.11.2022.
3
No formal steps are called for as the respondents are duly represented.
The respondents may file their reply on or before 19.10.2022. On the next date fixed, the Secretary, Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, shall remain present before the Court.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Deepak Kumar Tiwari)
Chief Justice Judge
Amit