Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. Mr. Mani contended that on September 17, 2020, the petitioner through an e-mail requested the respondent to consider Section.34 of The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 ('RPWD Act, 2016', for short) but the respondent have not responded to it and have completely ignored the mandate of the RPWD Act, 2016.

9. Mr. Mani also stated that the respondent failed to address the grievances of the petitioner. The petitioner on September 27, 2020, approached the Court of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (Divyangjan) ['CCPD', for short]. The CCPD has passed its Order dated January 07, 2021, in favour of the petitioner wherein in paragraphs 31 and 32 the CCPD directed the respondent to correct its advertisement by clearly indicating the number of reserved seats for the PwD category as per the relevant provisions of the RPWD Act, 2016.

Paragraphs 31 and 32 of the Order passed by the CCPD reads as under: -

"31. From the perusal of the advertisement, it is prima facie evident that Respondent has mentioned about reservation for PwBD in casual manner. Language and mode of mentioning reservation for PwBDs is in complete violation of DoPT OM Dated 26.11.2012,....................."

Ms. Gupta submitted that the PwD candidates were given an age relaxation of 10 years for appearing in the CBT of 2020 by the respondent. Further, all prescribed guidelines for conducting written examinations for persons with benchmark disabilities were duly followed.

21. That the respondent received a notice dated October 26, 2020, issued by the CCPD on the complaint filed by the petitioner that in the advertisement dated July 11, 2020, not even a single seat is reserved for PwD. It was also submitted by Ms. Gupta that the petitioner in the said complaint also stated that there is a violation of Section.34 of the RPWD Act, 2016 and the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India in regard to the result declaration for the preliminary examination. Thereafter, the respondent submitted its detailed reply relying upon the RPWD Act, 2016 and the relevant OMs issued by the DoPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions viz. OM dated March 27, 2012, stating consolidated order on relaxation in upper age limit allowed to various categories of government servants wherein the extent of age concession for the PwDs is 10 years. The respondent also relied upon the OM dated January 15, 2018, stipulating that the reservation for PwDs are horizontal reservations that cut across vertical reservations i.e., reservations for SC / ST / OBC. The relevant extract of the OM dated January 15, 2018, relied upon by Ms. Gupta is reproduced as under: -

That apart, Ms. Gupta also relied upon the OM dated August 29, 2018, stating guidelines for conducting written examination for persons with benchmark disabilities 2018.

22. Further, Ms. Gupta stated that an application was filed on January 28, 2021, under covering email dated January 28, 2021, for personal hearing and for re-calling the order dated January 07, 2021, passed by the CCPD. In addition, an email dated February 12, 2021, and a letter dated February 15, 2021, was sent to CCPD requesting to list the said application, however, the application was not listed.