Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"2. The respondent, by notification dated 30.10.2013 invited applications from eligible candidates to fill up two posts of Process Server. Out of two posts, one post was reserved for category 2A and the other was reserved for General Merit (PH) (Vision Impairment). The qualification prescribed was SSLC. The petitioner applied for the post of Process Server claiming reservation under 2A category as well as physically challenged quota. The petitioner was called for interview under notice dated 27.09.2018 (Annexure-E). Annexure-F indicates the marks obtained by the petitioner in the interview i.e., 6.5 out of 10 marks. Under notification dated 26.10.2018 (Annexure-G) of the respondent, one post of Process Server was filled up which was meant for category 2A Rural. But one post meant for General Merit (Physically Handicapped) (for short 'GM-PH') (blind/low vision) was not filled up and in that regard, it is stated that a fresh notification would be issued. The petitioner named in additional list in the said notification. Thereafter, the petitioner is said to have submitted representation on 19.12.2018 to consider his candidature for appointment as Process Server against the post of GM-PH, to which the respondent issued endorsement dated 27.12.2018 stating that circular dated 19.02.2018 would not permit appointment of a physically challenged person of a different category. Thereafter, a fresh notification dated 14.12.2018 (Annexure-A) for appointment of 21 posts of Process Servers including one backlog post was published. Aggrieved by the impugned endorsement, as well as fresh notification for recruitment of one backlog post to Process Server, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is physically challenged person having 45% of hearing impairment and to substantiate the same, he has produced Annexure- D/Certificate issued by the Medical Board, K.R.Hospital, Mysore. Further, he submits that in pursuance of the notification dated 30.10.2013 (Annexure-B), the petitioner applied for the post of Process Server claiming reservation under 2A category as well as Physically Challenged. It is submitted that out of two posts of Process Server, one post was reserved to 2A category and one for General Merit-Physically Challenged ('GM-PH' for short). Learned counsel invites attention of this Court to Annexure-F wherein the petitioner is awarded 6.5 marks out of 10 marks in the interview. Learned counsel contends that the respondent committed grave illegality in not selecting the petitioner for the post of Process Server reserved for GM-PH. It is his submission that even though the petitioner had applied for the post of Process Server under 2A category and had also produced Certificate of Disability, the Respondent has failed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Process Server reserved for Physically Challenged under General Merit category. It is his submission that even a candidate who had applied under reserved category would be entitled for consideration of his case under General Merit category. It is his submission that the post under notification dated 30.10.2013 was reserved for Physically Challenged (low vision), but as the candidate belonging to GM-PH (low vision) was not available, as per the Government Order dated 01.08.2009, the post reserved for Physically Handicapped could be filled up by a candidate belonging to Physically Handicapped having other disabilities. Since the petitioner was a physically challenged candidate having hearing impairment, ought to have been considered in view of the above stated Government Order. Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays for allowing the writ petition and to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment for the post under GM-PH.

- 10 -

against the quota reserved for respective backward class.

8. The Notification dated 30.10.2013 inviting applications would indicate that out of 2 posts of Process Server, one post was reserved for category 2A and other post was for Physically Challenged (low vision) under General Merit category. As on the date of notification the persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection Of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 was in force and subsequently the same was repealed under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, which came into force on 27th December 2016. A person claiming reservation under 2A category or any other reserved category would be entitled for consideration of his case under General Merit quota also. When one post is reserved for Physically Challenged under General Merit, the respondent ought to have considered the case of the petitioner for the said post, reserved for Physically Handicapped under General Merit. It is true that under the recruitment notification, reserved post of Physically Handicapped is earmarked for low vision. But, it is an admitted fact that no candidate belonging to Physically handicapped (low vision) was available nor made an application in pursuance of the notification. It is also an admitted fact that the petitioner was the only candidate who had applied under Physically handicapped. The petitioner is a physically handicapped having hearing impairment. Annexure-D/Certificate for

- 12 -

C¸Àé¸ÀÜvÉ ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀªÀjUÉ «ÄøÀ°j¸ÀvÀPÀÌzÉÝAzÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ F ©AzÀÄUÀ¼ÉzÀÄgÀÄ ¤¢ðµÀÖ¥Àr¹zÀ CAUÀ«PÀ® C¨sÀåyðUÀ¼ÀÄ ®¨sÀåªÁUÀ¢zÀÝ°è ¨ÉÃgÉ CAUÀ«PÀ®vÉ EgÀĪÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß DAiÉÄÌUÉ ¥ÀjUÀt¸ÀvÀPÀÌzÉÝAzÀÄ DzÉò¸À¯ÁVzÉ."

(underlined by me)

9. A careful reading of the above portion of the Government Order makes it clear that when Physically Handicapped candidate belonging to a particular disability which is reserved under the Notification is not available, the said post reserved for Physically Handicapped could be filled up by a candidate who suffers from other physical disability. The said Government Order was in force as on the date of Notification dated 30.10.2013 inviting applications to fill up the post of Process Server. The circular dated 19.02.2018 which is relied on by the respondent has come into force subsequently and a reading of the circular dated 19.02.2018 makes it clear that it is made applicable prospectively stating that, the instructions shall be taken note of while notifying the vacancies in future. Thus, the respondents committed grave error in not considering the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Process Server under GM-PH.