1. A differently abled person, is aggrieved by non-reservation of vacancies for the disabled even after the Parliament provided for equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation by an enactment titled Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act ,1995 (for brevity, “Disabilities Act”). The sentiment expressed in the above enactment has been imbibed and reiterated by the Legislature of the State in sub-section (5) of Section 80 of the Kerala State Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (for short “Societies Act”) to provide for such reservation in the co-operative societies within the state and regulated by the Act of the State Legislature. Despite this, the respondent society has acted in total violation of the statutory provisions; by inviting applications for appointment to the post of Peons, in the society, without reserving the 3%, entitled to the disabled by the aforementioned two enactments, is the contention.

2. The petitioner claims to be a physically challenged person having 50% disability, as evidenced by the disability certificate, Exhibit P1. The second respondent society is a Class I Society registered under the provisions of the Societies Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The staff pattern of the bank as disclosed in the sanction of the Joint-Registrar (General), Exhibit P2 is a total of 18. The petitioner has produced three notifications, Exhibits P3, P4 and P5, published at the instance of the respondent society inviting applications to the posts of Peons, Nightwatchman and Salesmen. The appointment to the post of Nightwatchman is submitted to have been deferred at the instruction of the Joint Registrar. Going by the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent society, the steps taken by the society is to fill up a total of four posts, viz., three posts of Peons and one post of Salesman. Hence as at present it is to be presumed that the bank intends to make appointments only with respect to Exhibit P4 and Exhibit P5 notifications. Exhibit P4 notification is one in which a post of Peon was sought to be filled up as a special drive to appoint Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes. Exhibit P5 is a notification inviting applications to the post of one Salesman and two Peons. Going by Exhibit P5 notification, one post of Peon is again reserved for Schedule Caste/Scheduled Tribe and the other post is to be filled up from the general merit.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that while making appointment to the post of Peons, it was incumbent upon the society to have made reservation as per sub-section (5) of Section 80 of the Societies Act and in the case of the respondent-Society; more specifically, reservation of one post as per the proviso to the said sub-section. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that though the Disabilities Act may not apply to the societies, reservation to the disabled is statutorily recognised by providing for reservation for the disabled in the Societies Act. That the reservation provided is to the total posts available in the society is also clear from the words employed in subsection (5). In Anandavally, M. v. President, Aleppey District Co-operative Bank [2008 (3) ILR Kerala 702] a learned Single Judge has dilated on how the reservation is to be applied and the said decision is affirmed in appeal, W.A.No.2105 of 2008 dated 27.01.2009. This Court, therein, was concerned with sub-section (4) of Section 80 which deals with the reservation of Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes; and sub-section (5) also employ the same language.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent, however, would contend that the 3% reservation though mandatory, the post to which it has to be applied can be decided only by the employer Society. What the proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 80 provides is that, in all societies where there are more than 10 employees, but less than 33, there shall be one post reserved