SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Mad) 1573

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE E. PADMANABHAN
Master J.Rajkumar Minor - Appellant
Versus
The Secretary Educational Department Government of Tamil Nadu Secretariat & Others - Respondents
WRIT PETITION NO:36981 AND WPMP NO:55294 OF 2002
Decided On : 30 December 2002

Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:Mr.E.Omprakash, Advocate for M/s.Ramalingam Associates. For the Respondents: Mr.V.r.Rajasekaran, Spl.Govt.Pleader.

The main legal point established is that Section 39 of The Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 mandates the reservation of not less than 3% seats for persons with disabilities in government and aided educational institutions, and failure to comply with this provision is justiciable through a writ of mandamus.

Headnote:

Mandamus - Reservation for Persons with Disabilities - The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 - Section 39

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a physically handicapped student, sought a writ of mandamus to enforce the 3% reservation for persons with disabilities as per The Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 and secure admission to an MBBS course. The petitioner was denied admission despite being placed in the waiting list for physically handicapped students.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the State failed to implement the mandatory 3% reservation for persons with disabilities in educational institutions, as required by Section 39 of The Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. The petitioner, certified fit to pursue the MBBS course, was entitled to admission under the reserved quota.

Issues: The issues were whether a writ of mandamus should be issued to enforce the 3% reservation for persons with disabilities and whether the petitioner was entitled to admission under the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 39 of the Act mandates all government educational institutions and those receiving government aid to reserve not less than 3% seats for persons with disabilities. The State's reservation of only three seats, instead of the required 39, was found to be non-compliant with the Act. The court directed the State to enforce the 3% reservation and admit the petitioner to the MBBS course.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the court directed the respondents to admit the petitioner to the MBBS course and enforce the 3% reservation for persons with disabilities in all government and aided educational institutions.

Judgment :-

The writ petitioner, a minor and a physically handicapped, represented by his father has come before this court praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the third respondent to implement 3% reservation for persons with disabilities as provided under The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and allot MBBS seat to the Petitioner herein for the year 2002-2003.

2. All the respondents have entered appearance through the Special Government Pleader (Education). With the consent of counsel appearing on either side, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

3. The petitioner, a physically handicapped, who applied for the first year MBBS/BDS course selection was placed as No.5 in the list of candidates selected under the Category of Physically Handicapped Students, was asked to appear for counselling on 19.9.2002 for BDS Payment Seat. On verification, the petitioner came to know that he was not allotted MBBS Seat and if at all he may apply for BDS, but on payment category. The petitioner was placed No.5 in the list of handicapped persons selected. But, only three students have been admitted to the MBBS course. 3% reservation has not been made in all educational institutions including Medical/Dental and if the said principle is applied 39 seats have to be reserved for handicapped persons in the whole of the State. 3% reservation has been made mandatory by the Provisions of the Central Legislation namely, The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995.The said Act provides that all Government Educational Institutions and other Educational Institutions receiving aid from the Government shall reserve not less than 3% seats for persons with disabilities. The said enactment is passed on the World Human Rights Proclamation, to which India is a signatory. The provision is mandatory and till date, the respondent-State Government has not provided 3% reservation in the admission to Educational Courses in the State. Hence the present writ petition.

4. The petitioner relies upon Section 39 of the said Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. According to the petitioner, the respondents have failed to give effect to the said mandatory provision. Ignoring the said mandatory provision only three seats have been reserved which is far less than the reservation provided for in the Central Legislation. The petitioner having secured 285.37 out of 300 marks has been denied and deprived of admission. Hence the present writ petition seeking for a direction to reserve 3% of the seats in all Government Medical colleges established and run by the State and Government aided Medical Colleges and admit him.

5. Per contra, on behalf of the respondents, the third respondent has filed a counter affidavit. According to the third respondent the State Government has approved the admission procedure provided for reservation of certain number of MBBS/BDS seats for various special categories for the year 2002-2003 and physically handicapped are one among the categories of the persons for whom three seats are reserved for admission to MBBS course under the Special Category. The petitioner was not selected for admission as he was not within the zone of consideration since he has secured 285.37 marks, while others admitted, have scored more marks. It is contended that the reservation of 3% seats as provided in the Central Act 1/96 could not be given effect to in all courses as the Government has to necessarily keep in view the type of course and the suitability of the physically handicapped persons to undergo such courses, such as Medicine.

6. If the extent of disability is more that would put the physically handicapped persons in a disadvantageous position and they would also face practical difficulties in undergoing the medical courses and even continuing





























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top