Back
2016 Supreme(Guj) 1353
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.B. Pardiwala, J.
Tailor Keyur Atulbhai and Ors. – Appellants
Vs.
State of Gujarat and Ors. – Respondents
Special Civil Application Nos. 17683, 17676, 17800 of 2014, 20491, 20350, 20405, 21088 of 2015, 58 and 89 of 2016 and Civil Application No. 3954 of 2015 in Special Civil Application No. 17683 of 2014
Decided On : 22-07-2016
For the Appellant :K.B. Pujara, Bhargav Hasurkar, Mayur V. Dhotare, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Manisha Lavkumar Shah, GP and Swapneshwar Goutam, AGP.
IMPORTANT POINT: (1) Section 32 of the Act stipulates that appropriate Governments shall (a) Identify posts in the establishments, which can be reserved for the persons with disability, and (b) At periodical intervals not exceeding three years, review the list of identified and up-date the list taking into consideration the developments in technology.
(2) The 1995 Act was enacted to fulfill India's obligations under the 'Proclamation on the Full Participation and Equality of the People with Disabilities in the Asia and Pacific Region'.
Headnote:The Constitution of India, 1950—Article 14, 16, 226—Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995—Section 2(b), 2(t), 32, 33—Present bunch of writ applications are filed by 100 % visually impaired candidates seeking 3% reservation, that they are eligible and qualified for being appointed as teachers and also to quash and set aside the impugned notification issued by the respondent No. 1—Objective behind the 1995 Act is to integrate PWD into the society and to ensure their economic progress—Held that the competence of the appropriate government to issue such notification under section 33 after taking into consideration the nature of job required to be performed is well established—Section 32 authorizes the appropriate government to identify the posts suitable to be filled up by PWD—Section 32 of the act also covers the States to constitute an Expert Committee for identification of suitable jobs in Govt. Establishments—Once posts are identified under Section 32, the purpose behind such identification cannot be frustrated by prescribing a mode of recruitment which results in denial of statutory reservation.
Result—Applications disposed of without disturbing impugned notification.
J.B. Pardiwala, J.
1. Since the issues raised in all the captioned writ applications are more or less the same and the challenge to the Notification dated 12th February 2013 issued by the State Government is also selfsame, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.
2. For the sake of convenience, the Special Civil Application No. 17683 of 2014 is treated as the lead matter.
3. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicants, visually impaired candidates with 100% visual impairment, have prayed for the following reliefs:-
"9(a) to admit this petition and to issue notice for final disposal and to allow the same;
(b) to quash and set aside the illegal action of the respondents in not providing reservation of at least 3% of the vacancies for disabled persons in the 548 vacancies notified for the subject of languages and in the 800 vacancies notified for the subject of Social Sciences in the advertisement dated. 20-11-2014 at Annexure-A for recruitment of Teachers/Vidya-sahayaks for Upper Primary Schools (Std. 6 to 8);
(c) to hold and declare and direct that the respondents are duty bound to reserve and to fill up at least 16 vacancies by disabled persons out of 548 vacancies notified for vidya-sahayaks of language subject and at least 24 vacancies by disabled persons out of 800 vacancies notified for vidya-sahayaks of Social Sciences subject pursuant to the advertisement dated 20-11-2014 at Annexure-A, in accordance with Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995.
(d) to hold and declare and direct that the respondents are duty bound to reserve and to fill up at least 8 vacancies by persons suffering from blindness or low-vision out of 548 vacancies notified for Vidya-sahayaks by persons suffering from blindness or low-vision out of 800 vacancies notified for vidya-sahayaks of Social Sciences subject pursuant to the advertisement dtd. 20-11-2014 at Annexure-A, in accordance with Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 read with the Notification dtd. 12-12-2013 at Annexure-C;
(e) to hold and declare and direct that the petitioners are eligible and qualified for bearing appointed as Teachers/Vidya-sahayaks for Upper Primary Schools (Std. 6 to 8) pursuant to the advertisement dtd. 20-11-2014 at Annexure-C;
(f) to direct the respondents, their agents and servants to consider the petitioners' candidatures and to give them appointments as per their merit as Teachers/Vidya-sahayaks for Upper Primary Schools (Std. 6 to 8) pursuant to the advertisement dtd. 21-11-2014 at Annexure-A with all the consequential benefits.
(g) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to direct the respondent No. 2 to physically accept the petitioners' applications forms and to consider their candidatures and to give them appointments as per their merit as Teachers/Vidya Sahayaks for Upper Primary Schools (Std. 6 to 8) pursuant to the advertisement dtd. 21-11-2014 at Annexure-A subject to further orders that may be passed in the present petition.
(h) to grant any other appropriate and just reliefs;
9(i) to quash and set aside the impugned Notification dated 12th February, 2013 issued by the respondent No. 1 in purported exercise of powers under Section 33 of the Persons with Disability (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 as per Annexure - C;
9(j) to hold and declare and direct that the petitioners - 100% blind candidates - are eligible to be selected and appointed as Vidya-sahayaks/Primary School Teachers under the respondents and the respondents cannot exclude them from being selected and appointed as such merely because they are 100% blind;
9(k) to direct the respondents, their agents and servants not to exclude the present petitioners - 100% blind candida
