Disposed

Jyothish Chandra v. Vs Secretary to Government

Kerala HC15 Oct 2010WP(C)/28463/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, physically handicapped persons registered with the Employment Exchange, contended they were not being considered for appointment under the prescribed quota while later registered persons were considered. Upholding a prior judgment, the court directed the District Collector to identify vacancies and make appointments for physically handicapped candidates within two months.

What did the court decide?

Second Respondent (District Collector) directed to identify vacancies and make appointments for physically handicapped persons within two months.

Jyothish Chandra v. Vs Secretary to Government — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2010 / 23RD ASWINA 1932

¶5

WP(C).No. 28463 of 2004(L)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

---------------------

¶8

1. JYOTHISH CHANDRA V., S/O. SANKARAN, NEAR RED STAR READING ROOM, P.O. TALIPARAMBA.

¶9

2. V. VIJAYAN, S/O. V.M. ACHARY, VECHIYOT HOUSE, KEEZHATTOOR, THALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

-------------------------

¶13

1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION, (SERVICES-D) DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM.

¶14

2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR.

¶15

3. DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, KANNUR.

¶16

R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P. NANDAKUMAR

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

...2/-

¶20

WP(C).No. 28463 of 2004(L) -2-

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶23

EXT.PI(a) & (b) : COPY OF THE CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL BOARD.

¶24

EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE SCHEME. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED IN THE O.P.30508/01. EXT.P4 : NIL EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO. 37/2009/SWD DATED 26/8/2009. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13/11/2009 IN WP(C) 37085/2008 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT.

¶25

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

¶26

EXT.R3(a) : COPY OF REGISTRATION INDEX CARD OF 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.R3(b) : COPY OF REGISTRATION INDEX CARD OF 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.R3(c) : COPY OF GO(P) 20/98/P&ARD DT. 14-7-98. EXT.R3(d) : COPY OF GO (MS) 41/89/P&ARD DT. 28-12-99. EXT.R3(e) : COPY OF STATE EMPLOYMENT MINUTES 1/85.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

W.P.(C) No.28463 OF 2004

¶32

Dated this the 15^th day of October, 2010.

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

petitioners are physically handicapped persons registered with the Employment Exchange. Their grievance in this writ petition is that they are not being considered for appointment in the quota prescribed for physically handicapped persons and at the same time persons registered with the Employment Exchange, subsequently to the registration of the petitioners are being considered for appointment. According to them the Government has issued Ext.P5 Government order regarding implementation of reservation for physically handicapped persons under the persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation), Act 1995. They would now seek action for recruitment of physically handicapped persons in terms of Ext.P5 Government order. The very question was earlier considered by a learned Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 37085 of 2008 by Ext.P6 judgment. Petitioner now seeks disposal of this case in terms of Ext.P6 judgment.

¶35

I have heard learned Government Pleader also.

¶36

¶37

W.P.(C) No.28463 OF 2004

¶38

In Ext.P6 judgment this Court has held as follows:-

¶39

“Petitioner is a physically handicapped person entitled to the benefit of reservation as provided under the persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation), Act 1995.

¶40

In this writ petition, her grievance is that though by Ext.P4 dated 11/9/07, she was called for an interview for appointment to the post of LD Typist and she appeared for the same appointments pursuant to Ext.P4 have not been made. It is stated that Vacancies which were in existence prior to 2004 are to be filled up following the scheme as formulated in Ext.P2 and as she was considered against a vacancy which was available prior to 2004, she is entitled to be appointed pursuant to Ext.P4.

¶41

Along with the counter affidavit, respondents have produced Go.(MS) No.37/2009/SWD dated 26/8/09 and the concluding portion of the order reads as under:

¶42

Government have examined the matter in detail. It is seen that the backlog vacancies for the years prior to 2004, for appointment of physically handicapped candidates have already been filled up in several districts. The directions of the Hon'ble High Court is to ascertain the backlog vacancies for the year 2002-03 for appointment of physically handicapped candidates by the District Collectors and to give appointment to those candidates selected by the District Collectors to those vacancies. In the circumstances Government are pleased to order that the District Collectors shall ascertain the backlog vacancies upto 31.12.2003 which are still unfilled and to give appointments to the physically handicapped candidates from the rank list prepared by the District Collectors, as per then existing scheme, strictly according to their rank, and the number of vacancies available.

¶43

From this, it is evident that the Government have also taken the view that vacancies for the years prior to 2004 are to be filled up following the method as laid down in Ext.P2, in pursuance to which, the petitioner was called for interview by Ext.P4.

¶44

Therefore, the only order that is now called for is that the 3^rd respondent, the District Collector shall take necessary action in pursuance to Ext.R1(a) Government Order referred to above. The vacancies shall be identified and appointments shall be made as ordered therein. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 2 months of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner

¶45

¶46

W.P.(C) No.28463 OF 2004

¶47

may produce a copy of this judgment before the 3^rd respondent for compliance.

¶48

Writ petition is disposed of as above.”

¶49

In view of the said judgment I am satisfied that this writ

¶50

petition has also to be disposed of in terms of that judgment. Accordingly the second respondent District Collector shall take necessary action in accordance with Ext.P5 Government order, vacancies which can be filled up by physically handicapped persons shall be identified and appointments shall be made as ordered therein, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months of production of a copy of this judgment, if not already done. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the second respondent for compliance.

¶51

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶52

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE.

¶53

mns

Jyothish Chandra v. Vs Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyothish Chandra v. Vs Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.Pankajakshi Amma Vs State of Kerala

The Commissioner of Customs and Others Vs a.P.Steel Re-Rolling Mill Pvt. Ltd.

M/S. Altima Tours and Travels Pvt.Ltd. Vs Union of India & Another

C.D.Sasikumar Vs Dr.S.Raveendran I.A.S

Balish P.P. Vs the University of Calicut

Kanakarajan Vs State of Kerala