Kerala High Court Disposes of Disabled Candidate's Plea for Scribe After Registry Rejects Request - 2024-10-24

Law Updates Made Simple.

Kerala High Court Disposes of Disabled Candidate's Plea After Scribe Request is Rejected

ERNAKULAM: The Kerala High Court on Thursday disposed of a writ petition filed by a disabled candidate seeking accommodation for a scribe for the Office Attendant recruitment examination. The court closed the case after being informed that the High Court's administrative side had formally rejected the petitioner's request.

The bench, presided over by Justice Murali Purushothaman , concluded the proceedings, stating that since a decision had been made on the petitioner's representation, nothing further remained for the court to consider in the current petition.

---

Background of the Case

The petitioner, Rajesh R., a 50-year-old individual with a disability, had applied for the post of Office Attendant as advertised by the High Court of Kerala. He had submitted an e-mail on October 16, 2024, requesting the provision of a scribe to assist him during the examination, citing his disability certificate.

When no decision was forthcoming on his request, Rajesh R. approached the High Court by filing a writ petition, seeking a directive to the High Court's recruitment wing to decide on his representation.

Court Proceedings and Final Order

During the hearing on October 24, 2024, the counsel for the High Court of Kerala submitted that a formal order had been passed rejecting the petitioner's request for a scribe. This action was taken in compliance with an earlier direction from the court dated October 17, 2024, which had likely instructed the administration to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's e-mail representation.

Upon this submission, Justice Purushothaman noted that the primary relief sought—a decision on the representation—had been addressed. The judgment stated:

"It is submitted by the learned counsel for the 1st respondent that pursuant to the direction of this Court in order dated 17.10.2024, an order has been passed rejecting Ext.P4 request of the petitioner. In view of the above, nothing remains to be considered in the writ petition and accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of."

Implications of the Judgment

This judgment is procedural in nature and does not delve into the merits of whether the rejection of the scribe request was legally valid or in accordance with the rights of persons with disabilities. The court's decision was limited to ensuring that the administrative authority (the High Court Registry) had acted upon the candidate's plea.

The disposal of the writ petition means this particular legal challenge has concluded. However, the petitioner, Rajesh R., now has the option to file a new petition to specifically challenge the legality and constitutionality of the order that rejected his request for a scribe.