Point of Law : Permanent disability - Appointment - It is true that it is not necessary to frame separate set of rules for providing reservation in appointments of persons other than District Judges to judicial service of State - If Governor of State, after consultation with PSC and High Court exercising jurisdiction relating to such State, makes rules adopting or applying reservation rules as they apply to Civil Services of State or with modification as is deemed just and proper.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Kumar, J.

The petitioner, a Law Graduate of the year 2011 from Jammu University, claims to be a person with permanent disability (Locomotor disability) to the extent of 50%. He is aggrieved by the Notification issued by the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission [PSC] bearing No. PSC/Exam/2013/111 dated 24.12.2013 for conducting Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service (Judicial) Competitive Examination, 2013 insofar as it

does not provide for any reservation for persons with disabilities in terms of Jammu and Kashmir Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation), Act, 1998 [ „the Act of 1998’]. The petitioner, therefore, claims that PSC should have considered him under open merit category against one of the total six posts and that the said post ought to have been earmarked for persons with disabilities under the Act of 1998.

2. This petition is vehemently contested by the respondents including respondent No.8 who is a candidate last in merit in the General Category.

3. Before we advert to the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties, we find it necessary to give brief resume of the material facts as are necessary for disposal of this petition.

That PSC vide Advertisement Notification dated 24.12.2013 (supra) invited applications from the eligible candidates for participating in J&K Civil Service (Judicial) Competitive Examination, 2013. The break up of vacancies was given as under:

There was, however, no vacancy earmarked for persons with disabilities. The petitioner, who intended to seek the benefit of reservation provided under the Act of 1998, filed an application under Right to Information Act and in response whereof, he was given information that 164 persons had been selected/appointed as Munsiff from 20.04.2000 (after coming into force the Act of 1998) up to 14.11.2013 i.e immediately before the issuance of impugned Notification. From the information supplied, the petitioner also found that, out of 164 vacancies of Munisff, filled up by the PSC from time to time, not even a single vacancy had been notified or offered to the persons with disabilities. The petitioner has given the detail of the posts in different categories filled up from 20.04.2000 to 14.11.2013. Feeling aggrieved by the manner in which the mandate of Act of 1998 and the Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Act, 2004 [„Act of 2004’] read with Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Rules, 2005 [„Rules of 2005’] had been carried by the PSC and the High Court, the petitioner, as it appears, submitted application form in response to the Advertisement Notification obviously seeking consideration as a general category candidate, but decided to assail the impugned Notification while the process of selection was underway.

4. The instant petition was filed by the petitioner on 07.03.2014 i.e after slightly more than two months. The selection in terms of the impugned Notification was completed by the PSC and the candidates selected were appointed as Munsiff. However, one post in the reserved category was not filled up and kept reserved in compliance to the interim order dated 10.03.2014.

5. One Rekha Sharma, who has staked her claim against the post reserved vide interim order aforesaid, because of her merit, was subsequently arrayed as party respondent No.8 by this Court vide order dated 24.08.2017.

6. Respondent No.3 i.e the High Court of J&K has taken a stand that the Act of 1998 which was in force when the impugned Notification was issued, was not, ipso facto, applicable to the appointments of Judicial Officers, other than the District Judges, unless the Governor of the State frames rules in this behalf after consultation with the PSC and the High Court in terms of Se