Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(iv) all educational institutions funded by appropriate Government shall provide M inclusive education to the children with disabilities;
(v) a National Fund is proposed to provide financial support to persons with disabilities;
(vi) stakeholders' participation in the policy making through Central and State Advisory Boards;
(vii) increase in reservation in posts from existing three per cent. to five per cent. In the vacancies for persons or class of persons with benchmark disabilities in every establishment and reservation of seats for students with benchmark disabilities in higher educational institutions;

CHAPTER VI SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR PERSONS WITH 14 of 20 Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:050503 2023:PHHC:050503 BENCHMARK DISABILITIES

31. Free education for children with benchmark disabilities-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rights of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, every child with benchmark disability between the age of six to eighteen years shall have the right to free education in a neighbourhood school, or in a special school, of his choice.

(ii) constitute an expert committee with representation of persons with benchmark disabilities for identification of such posts; and

(iii) undertake periodic review of the identified posts at an interval not exceeding three years.

34. Reservation.-(1) Every appropriate Government shall appoint in every Government establishment, not less than four per cent. of the total number of vacancies in the cadre strength in each group of posts meant to be filled with persons with benchmark disabilities of which, 15 of 20 Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:050503 2023:PHHC:050503 one per cent. each shall be reserved for persons with benchmark disabilities under clauses (a), (b) and (c) and one per cent. for persons with benchmark disabilities under clauses (d) and (e), namely:--

28. Counsel for the respondent is not in position to dispute that conjoint reading of Section 2(r), 2(zc) and schedule appended to 2016 Act leaves no doubt that the petitioner falls within the ambit of definition of 'person with benchmark disability' as adumbrated under 2016 Act.

29. In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds that once the petitioner is held to be a person with benchmark disability, even though owing the multiple disabilities which has been recognized under Section 2(r) of 2016 Act as well as the rules framed under 1995 Act, there is no reason for the respondents to deny the claim of the petitioner for extension in service upto 60 years. This Court has no hesitation in holding that once Act of 1995 stands repealed and substituted by Act No.49 of 2016, explanation 1 appended to Rule 3.27 of 1970 Rules shall be read in the light of definition of 'person with benchmark disability' as defined under Section 2(r) of 2016 Act.