SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(AP) 689

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
RAVI NATH TILHARI, J.
Sripada Sai Ram – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh and another – Respondents
Writ Petition Nos. 24475, 3758 & 22582 of 2021
Decided on : 21-10-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sri M. Pitchaiah
For the Respondents: Sri N. Aswartha Narayana

Headnote:

The impugned G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 05.01.2021 and the Notification dated 24.09.2021 suffer from no violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and Section 34 of the Act 2016.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, who are physically handicapped persons, challenged the G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 05.01.2021 and the Notification dated 24.09.2021 issued by the Animal Husbandry Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, on the ground that they violate the equality clause inasmuch as certain class of physically handicapped i.e., O.H.category has been given undue advantage over other class of physically handicapped persons and thereby singling out the remaining physically handicapped classes or categories for hostile treatment which deprives them the equal opportunity and level playing field on par with orthopedically handicapped persons.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the impugned G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 05.01.2021 and the Notification dated 24.09.2021 were issued in exercise of the power conferred by the second proviso to Section 34 (1) of the Act 2016 which enables the Government to grant exemption, therefore, granting exemption vide Government Order dated 05.01.2021 in terms of the second proviso to Section 34 of the Act 2016 cannot be said to be in any way contrary to or inconsistent with Section 34 of the Act 2016.

Issues: Whether the impugned G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 05.01.2021 and the Notification dated 24.09.2021 suffer from violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and Section 34 of the Act 2016?

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the impugned G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 05.01.2021 and the Notification dated 24.09.2021 are neither without jurisdiction nor suffer from any violation of Section 34 of the Act 2016 or Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Court observed that Section 34 of the Act 2016 itself provides for criteria for grant of exemption i.e., having regard to the type of work carried out in any Government establishment and therefore the Act 2016 itself provides for such classification based on “nature of work” which can be performed by the persons suffering from one kind of disability but cannot be performed effectively by the persons suffering from other kind of disability. Such a classification based on “nature of work” could not be argued to be not a reasonable classification.

Final Decision: The Court dismissed all the writ petitions filed by the petitioners, holding that the impugned G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 05.01.2021 and the Notification dated 24.09.2021 are neither without jurisdiction nor suffer from any violation of Section 34 of the Act 2016 or Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Sri M. Pitchaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri N. Aswartha Narayana, learned Government Pleader for Services-I, for the respondents in all the writ petitions.

2. In W.P.No.3758 of 2021 the petitioners are challenging G.O.Ms.No.2, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development & Fisheries (AH.I) Department, dated 05.01.2021, issued by the 1st respondent-the State of Andhra Pradesh being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 (in short “the Act 2016”).

3. The 1st petitioner – Metta Jyotsna is a physically handicapped person, suffering from low vision to the extent of 40% as certified by the Medical Board of Rajiv Gandhi Institute Medical Sciences, Srikakulam on 25.03.2014 covered under the benchmark disability within the meaning of the Act 2016. The 1st petitioner is a Graduate in Bachelor of Veterinary Sciences (in short “B.V.Sc”) and Animal Husbandry (A.H) and she studied in N.T.R.Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry College, Gannavaram, Krishna District during the academic year 2013-18.

4. The 2nd petitioner – Maddirala Avula Reddy is Graduate in B.V.Sc. and A.H. and studied the same during the academic years 2013-18 in the same N.T.R.Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry College, Gannavaram and he is visually handicapped (V.H)i.e., low vision to the extent of 40% as certified by the Medical Board of Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Medical Science, Ongole.

5. W.P.No.22582 of 2021 has been filed by the same petitioners as in W.P.No.3758 of 2021 and W.P.No.24475 of 2021 has been filed by Sripada Sai Ram challenging the Notification in Roc.No.917/BII/B2/2021, dated 24.09.2021, issued by the 2nd respondent-the Director of Animal Husbandry, Labbipet, Vijayawada, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh, by which, applications are invited from eligible candidates for recruitment of differently abled Orthopedically Handicapped (O.H) for 12 posts of Veterinary Assistant Surgeons under backlog vacancy of Class-A category (6) in Andhra Pradesh Animal Husbandry Department.

6. The petitioner in W.P.No.24475 of 2021 is a Graduate in B.V.Sc and A.H and studied during the academic year 2015-16 in the college of Veterinary Science, Tirupathi, which is affiliated to Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University, Tirupathi and passed in the year 2021. This petitioner is a physically handicapped person suffering from low vision (VH), as certified by the Medical Board of Government District Head Quarters Hospital, Eluru, West Godavari District on 06.12.2012, i.e., 40% of low vision.

7. Thus, in W.P.No.3758 of 2021 there is challenge to G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 05.01.2021 and in W.P.No.22582 of 2021 and W.P.No.24475 of 2021 there is challenge to the notification dated 24.09.2021.

8. The G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 05.01.2021 and the Notification dated 24.09.2021 have been challenged mainly on the common ground that it violates the equality clause inasmuch as certain class of physically handicapped i.e., O.H.category has been given undue advantage over other class of physically handicapped persons and thereby singling out the remaining physically handicapped classes or categories for hostile treatment which deprives them the equal opportunity and level playing field on par with orthopedically handicapped persons. The challenge is on the ground of discrimination being made contrary to Sections 3, 4, 20, 21 and 34 of the Act 2016 and being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

9. The grounds of challenge being common, with the consent of the parties’ counsels all the three writ petitions are being decided by the common judgment.

10. Sri M. Pitchaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that Section 34 of the Act 2016 provides that every appropriate Government shall appoint in every Government establishment not less than 4% of the total number o

                                          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                                          1
                                          2
                                          3
                                          4
                                          5
                                          6
                                          7
                                          8
                                          9
                                          10
                                          11
                                          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                                          supreme today icon
                                          logo-black

                                          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                                          Please visit our Training & Support
                                          Center or Contact Us for assistance

                                          qr

                                          Scan Me!

                                          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                          whatsapp-icon Back to top