Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Sudesh Bansal, J.
Yogesh Kumar Saini - Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9387 of 2022
Decided On : 14-03-2023
Disability - Teacher Appointment - Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - Sections 2(r), 58, 59, 100, 101 - The court emphasized the validity of the disability certificate issued by the competent authority and the necessity of adhering to the benchmark disability criteria for appointment under the disabled category.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, claiming entitlement to a teaching position under the disabled category, was denied appointment based on a lower disability percentage determined by a medical board, despite holding a valid certificate indicating a higher percentage.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the medical board's report confirming a higher disability percentage was valid and should be accepted, thus entitling the petitioner to the position based on merit exceeding the cut-off.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to appointment as a Teacher Grade III Level I under the disabled category despite conflicting disability certificates.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the disability certificate issued by the competent authority must be upheld unless legally challenged, and the medical board's report constituted under court order was credible and should be considered.
Result: The court directed the respondents to issue an appointment order to the petitioner for the Teacher position.
JUDGMENT
1. Heard the petitioner present in person as also Learned Additional Advocate General appeared on behalf of respondents and perused the material on record.
2. By way of instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has led claim of his appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III Level I under LD/CP disabled category pursuant to advertisement No.01/2021-22 dated 31.12.2021.
3. Petitioner states that according to the disability certificate dated 13.01.2020 issued by the Department of Medical and Health, Government of Rajasthan (Ann-4), it stands proved that the petitioner suffers from Locomotor disability and in his diagnosis, his case is of amputation at right thumb, index and middle finger and it has been certified that the petitioner suffers from 41% permanent physical disability in his right hand. According to the petitioner, he posses the requisite educational qualifications and has secured 127 marks in Rajasthan Eligibility Examination for Teachers (REET) 2021; in the final selection list dated 02.05.2022 (Ann-9) for the post in question, the last cut-off marks under LD/CP disabled category is 125 marks, therefore, petitioner being higher in merit than last cut-off, is entitled for appointment. However, appointment to the petitioner has not been accorded by respondents. Petitioners states that respondents arbitrarily and illegally ousted the petitioner from the selection process at the stage of documents verification vide office order dated 13.05.2022 (Ann-10) issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Barmer stating that by Medical Board of respondents, the permanent disability of petitioner has been found 35% only, which is less than the required benchmark disability of 40%. Petitioner has challenged office order dated 13.05.2022 stating that the disability certificate of petitioner, issued by the Department of Medical and Health, Government of Rajasthan as per rules showing 41% permanent disability is valid and since petitioner has scored higher marks than the last cut-off marks in the category of LD/CP, not according appointment to petitioner in this category is violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
4. From perusal of record, it appears that on issuance of notice of writ petition, learned AAG on behalf of respondents accepted notices and in presence of both parties as also after placing reliance on the interim order dated 26.05.2022 passed in SBCWP No.6852/2022: Megha Dave Vs. State of Rajasthan and interim order dated 18.05.2022, passed in SBCWP No.5931/2022: Usha Tamoliya Vs. State of Rajasthan passed by the Rajasthan High Court at Principal Seat at Jodhpur following interim order was passed on 12.07.2022:
It is made clear that if petitioner fails to appear before the Medical Board as ordered, it will be deemed that certificate issued by the Medical Board constituted by respondent(s) is correct.
Office is directed to send the copy of this order to Superintendent, SMS Hospital, Jaipur for compliance.'
5. It appears that under directions of this Court, the Superintendent, SMS Hospital, Jaipur constituted a Medical Board of six experts to examine the physical disability of petitioner according to notification of the Department of Social Justice and Empowerment. The Medical Board, examined the petitioner, who appeared before the Medical Board as ordered by this Court and it has been reported by the Medical Board that petitioner suffers from Locomotor disability, amputation through right thumb, index and middle finger and suffers from permanent disability of 45%. The report of Medical Board dated 27.07.2022, placed on record by learned Additional Advocate General
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.
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 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 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.
The court ruled that visual impairment assessments must consider all relevant medical evidence, establishing a disabled candidate's eligibility for public service based on the higher disability perce....
Verification of disability certificates for employment must be justified, and previous certifications should not be disregarded without legitimate grounds.
Once a disability certificate is accepted for employment, it cannot be questioned later based solely on administrative errors, unless fraud is proven.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
