Differently abled candidates are entitled to reservation benefits if a post is identified after the initial notification and within the currency of the selection list, adhering to statutory provisions.

JUDGMENT

Muralee Krishna, J.

The 5^th respondent in O.A.No.2295 of 2023 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram (the ‘Tribunal’ for short) filed this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging Ext.P4 order dated 08.04.2025 passed by the Tribunal in that original application.

2. The 1^st respondent-applicant is a differently abled person with 80% permanent locomotor disability. As per the pleadings in the original application, he has the qualifications of B.Tech in Electronics and Communication Engineering and M.Tech in Digital Communication. He was appointed as Engineering Assistant (Electronics) in the Public Works Department (‘PWD’ for short) on contract basis as per order dated 03.03.2020 of the 5^th respondent Chief Engineer, Administration of PWD with effect from 11.03.2020 and was discharged from service on 27.06.2023. In the meanwhile, the petitioner Kerala Public Service Commission (‘KPSC’ for short), by Annexure A4 notification dated 15.11.2019, invited applications for the post of Engineering Assistants (Electronics)/Overseer Grade-I (Electronics) in PWD. The 1^st respondent-applicant who applied for the post appeared for the objective type test conducted on 28.12.2021, and he claimed reservation benefits under the quota of differently abled persons. But in Annexure A5 short list dated 12.10.2022 and Annexure A6 ranked list dated 09.03.2023 published by the KPSC, the 1^st respondent is not included.

2.1. The 1^st respondent then sought the reasons for his non- inclusion in the select list and ranked list under the quota of differently abled persons from the petitioner under the Right to Information Act by submitting Annexure A7 application dated 04.02.2023. By Annexure A8 letter dated 22.02.2023, the appellate authority of the petitioner informed the 1^st respondent that the post of Engineering Assistant/Overseer Grade I (Electronics) in PWD is not identified as suitable for D.A. Reservation. The 1^st respondent pleads that the 4^th respondent Director, Social Justice Department, after conducting a functionality assessment, decided to identify the post of Engineering Assistant/Overseer Grade I (Electronics) in PWD as suitable for D.A. Reservation and accordingly called for the opinion of the public and organisations as per Annexure A9 press release dated 20.09.2023. In that press release, the post of Engineering Assistant/Overseer Grade I (Electronics) is shown as Sub Engineer (Electronics). At present, there is no post named Sub Engineer in the PWD. But the 11^th Pay Commission in its report recommended to redesignate the post of Engineering Assistant (Electronics) in PWD as Sub Engineer (Electronics).

2.2. Aggrieved by the non-identification of the post of Engineering Assistant/Overseer Grade I (Electronics) in PWD as suitable for Differently Abled candidates, the 1^st respondent submitted Annexure A10 representation dated 04.10.2023 before the 4^th respondent, the Director, Social Justice Department. It was pointed out in Annexure A10 that since the post was already occupied by the 1^st respondent, who is a person with a benchmark disability, in view of Annexure A11 notification No.38-16/2020- DD-III dated 14.01.2021 issued by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India, the post shall be deemed to be identified. It is also pleaded by the 1^st respondent that in Annexure A11 it is stipulated that if a post is identified in the feeder category all the posts in the promotional grade should also stand identified and if a post having identical nature and place of job with res