IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
MADHURESH PRASAD, SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA, JJ.
Debika Karmakar - Appellant
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondent
WP.ST 130 of 2025
Decided On : 29-07-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner participated successfully in recruitment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner sought appointment based on prior success. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. validity of disability certificate emphasized. (Para 6 , 7 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. older certificate should prevail over newer findings. (Para 8 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. counterarguments regarding medical assessments made. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. reassessment not necessary without doubt on validity. (Para 18 , 21 , 22 , 24) |
| 7. denial of appointment unsustainable. (Para 25 , 26) |
| 8. order for immediate issuance of appointment directed. (Para 27 , 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The present writ petitioner participated in a process of selection for the post of Lower Division Clerk. Her candidature was under the Persons with Disabilities (PWD) category. In support of her claim as a PWD candidate, the petitioner relied upon a certificate of disability dated 08.01.2019 issued under Rule 18(1) of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2018. The certificate certified her disability to be 59 per cent based on a finding of her suffering with hearing impairment.
2. Having participated in the recruitment process, the applicant/writ petitioner emerged successful.
3. Prior to issuance of an appointment order, the petitioner was required to undergo a medical examination generally conducted prior to issuance of an appointment letter, to assess the general fitness of a candidate at the threshold of a government employment. In this medical examination dated 20.01.2023, conducted for this purpose, the Examining Authority (Board) has found the petitioner/applicant unfit for appointment, based on a finding that she suffers with 30 per cent hearing impairment. On such ground, the petitioner was not offered the appointment.
4. The petitioner approached the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) by filing an Original Application. In O.A. No. 603 of 2023 filed by the writ petitioner, she has sought a direction upon the respondents to issue appointment letter in her favour on the basis of her successful participation in the recruitment process.
5. Further prayer was made that authorities may be directed to issue the appointment letter without taking into consideration the opinion in the general Medical Examination on 20.01.2023.
6. It is submitted on behalf of the writ petitioner/applicant that in terms of the advertisement based on which the recruitment process was set in motion, a Medical Board constituted at a Government Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata, District Hospital; and Sub-divisional Hospitals were declared to be competent for issuing a certificate in respect of a candidate under PWD category. The certificate dated 08.01.2019 relied upon by the petitioner in the recruitment process is accordingly issued by a competent board in terms of the advertisement, as the same was issued by a Board at the Midnapore Medical College and Hospital. It is submitted that authenticity of the said certificate has never been doubted by any authority. The certificate continues to be valid under the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act and the Rules framed thereunder.
7. The Certificate dated 08.01.2019, is issued pursuant to an assessment of the petitioner’s hearing impairment by a competent Board including an Audiologist (specialist). The Certificate dated 08.01.2019 has a statutory sanctity. Authenticity of the same not being in doubt, there was no occasion for the authorities to rely upon a general medical examination dated 20.01.2023, of the applicant/petitioner, normally done prior to issuance of an appointment letter in the matter of public employment.
8. The authorities are bound to acknowledge the certificate; and without raising any objection based on a medical examination dated 20.01.2023, they ought to issue the appointment letter in favour of the petitioner.
9. Learned AGP, on the other hand, submits that prior to issuance of an appointment letter, there is a requirement of conducting a m
The statutory disability certificate issued under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act prevails over general medical assessments, ensuring the rights of individuals with disabilities in public....
The court affirmed the importance of valid disability certificates and the necessity of adhering to established benchmarks for disability in employment decisions.
The court held that a competent authority's disability assessment cannot be altered by another board, and reliance on incomplete medical reports for disqualification is arbitrary.
Once a disability certificate is accepted for employment, it cannot be questioned later based solely on administrative errors, unless fraud is proven.
The Appellate Medical Board's assessment should be given sanctity, and challenges to the constitution of the Special Medical Board should be raised in the writ petition. The State has a duty to make ....
The court established that additional minor disabilities should not disqualify candidates with 40% or more disability in one leg from public employment, reinforcing the principles of equality and non....
Proper examination and adherence to guidelines for granting disability certificates are crucial, especially in the context of admission to medical courses.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.