The State cannot differentiate between temporary and permanent disabilities in employment; individuals must not be deprived of their rights due to flaws in disability assessment, affirming equal treatment in job opportunities.

JUDGMENT :

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following prayer:-

“The petitioner therefore prays that, your Lordships may be graciously pleased to admit the petition, call upon the O.Ps to show cause as to why this petition shall not be allowed, and if they do not show just and appropriate cause or show no cause, allow this petition with cost and issue appropriate nature of writs quashing the order/letter under Annexures-12 and 13 and further directing the Opp.parties to engage this petitioner as Shikhya Sahayak under O.P.No.4 effective from the date Laxmipriya Biswal was engaged as such;

And/or pass such ‘other order as deemed just and proper;

And for this act of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.”

2. The facts of the case are that pursuant to an advertisement for engagement of Shikshya Sahayaks, the petitioner submitted her application under the physically handicapped category. She was provisionally selected under the unreserved category for engagement in Kalahandi district as per merit list published on 21.03.2016. The petitioner’s testimonials were verified by the District Project Coordinator, Kalahandi and she was assigned to Singhapur center under M. Rampur block. However, instead of issuing engagement order, she was referred to the Medical Board by the District Child Protection Officer on 13.04.2018 stating that she would be appointed later after approval of the Medical Board. The Dean & Principal of MKCG Medical College asked the petitioner to appear before the Appellate Medical Board on 25.10.2018 pursuant to which she appeared and her disability was assessed as 40% permanent and communicated to the Government by the Dean & Principal by his letter dated 17.11.2018. Since no engagement order was issued, the petitioner submitted representation to the District Education Officer, Kalahandi on 24.11.2018 followed by representations to the Collector on 07.12.2018. She also submitted representation to the Director, OSEPA as a similarly placed candidate, namely Laxmipriya Biswal had already been engaged. The Director sought for clarification from the administrative department vide letter dated 25.01.2019, which was followed by series of correspondence. Ultimately, it was clarified that the petitioner’s disability was permanent in nature. Since no engagement order was issued, she sought information under the R.T.I. Act in response to which she was informed by the State Project Director, OSEPA by letter dated 20.08.2019 that the medical report of disability after re-verification was received at a later time when the 1st round selection process had already been completed and her name had been placed in the reject list. The case of Laxmipriya Biswal was considered as by such time 1^st round engagement was under process. The petitioner therefore approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 14230 of 2019 praying for necessary direction to the authorities for her engagement. By order dated 16.08.2019, the writ application was disposed of directing the concerned authorities to take decision on the representations submitted by the petitioner. Pursuant to such order, the State Project Director by his order dated 27.09.2019, rejected the representation of the petitioner as being devoid of any merit on the same grounds as taken above. The petitioner claims to have been discriminated by the authorities since said Laxmipriya Biswal, who stands on the same footing was given engagement. Further, the petitioner and some o