Ability Forum

[kodakkal]

We append an important case law of Delhi High Court on reservation for People with Disability in promotion.  It affirms that though the persons with disability act does not specifically says so but spirit of the act supports the reservation even in promotion and allowed petition.  Link for judgements are below:



http://www.scribd.com/full/23875813?access_key=key-jpegepdg4eyhby4ho7d



Hope to get good inspiration from the judgements

_________________
KODAKKAL SHIVAPRASAD,FUWAI,
Award Winner & Record Holder-International Biographical NOte.
PRO- www.disabilityindia.org/legalaid.cfm#1
Web:http://www.kodakkal.ning.com
http://www.giveindia.org/m-890-society-for-child-development.aspx

We append an important case law of Delhi High Court on reservation for People with Disability in promotion.  It affirms that though the persons with disability act does not specifically says so but spirit of the act supports the reservation even in promotion and allowed petition.  Link for judgements are below:



http://www.scribd.com/full/23875813?access_key=key-jpegepdg4eyhby4ho7d



Hope to get good inspiration from the judgements

_________________
KODAKKAL SHIVAPRASAD,FUWAI,
Award Winner & Record Holder-International Biographical NOte.
PRO- www.disabilityindia.org/legalaid.cfm#1
Web:http://www.kodakkal.ning.com
http://www.giveindia.org/m-890-society-for-child-development.aspx

[Adverts]

[A_kumaresan]

It may also be noted that the case is pending at the Hon'ble Supreme Court on appeal from Govt. side.

_________________
LIVE AND LET LIVE
A KUMARESAN
9444277881

It may also be noted that the case is pending at the Hon'ble Supreme Court on appeal from Govt. side.

_________________
LIVE AND LET LIVE
A KUMARESAN
9444277881

[Dgaurav2]

CHENNAI: Three per cent of all available government jobs, including Group A and B category posts, should be reserved for deserving physically challenged and the benefit should not be confined only to Group C and D jobs, Madras High Court has said.

Giving a directive on a writ petition filed by G Suresh Kumar, a doctor, Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar made it clear to the Tamil Nadu government and the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission that they should not invite applications for posts without reserving 3% of the posts for disabled hereafter.

Suresh Kumar had approached the high court against a July 2005 notification of TNPSC inviting applications for appointing 1,825 assistant surgeons. The notification specifically stated that the physically challenged, who enjoyed mandatory 3% quota, need not apply.

Suresh Kumar cleared the written examination and was called for interview. He, however, was not selected. He then filed the writ petition stating he was not selected only because of the government's failure to earmark 3% quota for the disabled. The selection process was in violation of Section 33 of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995, he said.

TNPSC filed a counter-affidavit stating reservation for the physically challenged could be set apart only for Group 'C' and 'D' posts, and not for Group 'A' and 'B' category of posts. Citing a 1988 notification of the government, it said, Group A' and B' were executive posts, and hence there was no need to provide disabled quota. It added assistant surgeons were under the executive category posts for which quota was not required.

When Suresh Kumar challeged his rejection, the court allowed him to write the examination and attend the interview. He, however, did not reach "the zone of selection'' either for inclusion in the main selection list or in the reserve list on the basis of total marks secured by him, the TNPSC said.

The TNSC said as a bunch of cases, filed by candidates who were not selected due to mistakes on their part while writing the test, was dismissed by the high court and the Supreme Court, Suresh Kumar was not eligible for any relief now, the TNPSC said. Suresh Kumar was also among the candidates who were not selected due to mistakes such as not coding their answer papers and writing their registration numbers properly.

Justice Paul Vasanthakumar, noting that he could not grant any relief to the physicially challenged doctor in view of the apex court ruling, made it clear that the benefit of reservation for disabled could not be confined only to Group C and D posts. It should be made available to all categories of jobs, including Group A and B posts, he said.

CHENNAI: Three per cent of all available government jobs, including Group A and B category posts, should be reserved for deserving physically challenged and the benefit should not be confined only to Group C and D jobs, Madras High Court has said.

Giving a directive on a writ petition filed by G Suresh Kumar, a doctor, Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar made it clear to the Tamil Nadu government and the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission that they should not invite applications for posts without reserving 3% of the posts for disabled hereafter.

Suresh Kumar had approached the high court against a July 2005 notification of TNPSC inviting applications for appointing 1,825 assistant surgeons. The notification specifically stated that the physically challenged, who enjoyed mandatory 3% quota, need not apply.

Suresh Kumar cleared the written examination and was called for interview. He, however, was not selected. He then filed the writ petition stating he was not selected only because of the government's failure to earmark 3% quota for the disabled. The selection process was in violation of Section 33 of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995, he said.

TNPSC filed a counter-affidavit stating reservation for the physically challenged could be set apart only for Group 'C' and 'D' posts, and not for Group 'A' and 'B' category of posts. Citing a 1988 notification of the government, it said, Group A' and B' were executive posts, and hence there was no need to provide disabled quota. It added assistant surgeons were under the executive category posts for which quota was not required.

When Suresh Kumar challeged his rejection, the court allowed him to write the examination and attend the interview. He, however, did not reach "the zone of selection'' either for inclusion in the main selection list or in the reserve list on the basis of total marks secured by him, the TNPSC said.

The TNSC said as a bunch of cases, filed by candidates who were not selected due to mistakes on their part while writing the test, was dismissed by the high court and the Supreme Court, Suresh Kumar was not eligible for any relief now, the TNPSC said. Suresh Kumar was also among the candidates who were not selected due to mistakes such as not coding their answer papers and writing their registration numbers properly.

Justice Paul Vasanthakumar, noting that he could not grant any relief to the physicially challenged doctor in view of the apex court ruling, made it clear that the benefit of reservation for disabled could not be confined only to Group C and D posts. It should be made available to all categories of jobs, including Group A and B posts, he said.