Case Note & Summary
The case involves an appeal by the Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur and another against the order of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur. The private respondent, Neetu Harsh, had applied for the post of Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate in the Rajasthan Judicial Service Examination, 2016. The notification advertised 72 posts, with two reserved for persons with disabilities. The private respondent submitted her application indicating her category as 'General' and in the column for disability status, she marked 'No'. She paid the general category fee of Rs.250 and appeared for the preliminary and main examinations and interview as a general candidate. The result was declared on 15.11.2016, and she obtained 136 marks, placed at Serial No.137. Only one disabled candidate, Ms. Renu Motwani with 138 marks, was selected against the two reserved vacancies. Subsequently, on 28.11.2016, the private respondent made a representation claiming that she had 80% visual impairment and requested consideration under the disabled category. The appellants rejected her request. The High Court allowed her writ petition, directing the appellants to consider her candidature against the two vacancies reserved for disabled candidates. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order, holding that the private respondent had not claimed disability in her application and had participated in the selection as a general candidate. The Court emphasized that recruitment rules require strict compliance and that a candidate cannot change category after the process is complete. The appeal was allowed, and the High Court's order was quashed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Reservation for Disabled Persons - Claim After Selection Process - Candidate applied as General category, did not indicate disability in application - Later sought consideration under disabled quota after result - Held that candidate cannot be allowed to change category after participating in selection as General candidate (Paras 2-10).
B) Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 - Reservation - Application Procedure - Sections 33, 36 - Candidate must claim disability at time of application - Subsequent representation cannot override recruitment rules - Held that High Court erred in directing consideration under disabled quota (Paras 4-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a candidate who applied as a General category candidate and did not claim disability status in the application can later seek consideration under the disabled category after the selection process is complete.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The order of the High Court dated 04.05.2017 in DBCWP No.692 of 2017 is set aside. The writ petition filed by the private respondent stands dismissed.
Law Points
- Reservation for disabled persons
- Application for reserved category
- Estoppel by conduct
- Strict compliance with recruitment rules
- Persons with Disabilities Act
- 1995
Case Details
Civil Appeal No. 6696 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.18973 of 2017)
Meenakshi Arora (for appellants), Pallav Shishodia (for private respondent)
Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur & Anr.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeal against High Court order directing consideration of candidature under disabled category
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought to set aside High Court order directing them to consider private respondent's candidature under disabled category
Filing Reason
Private respondent applied as General category but later sought consideration under disabled quota after selection process
Previous Decisions
High Court allowed writ petition and directed appellants to consider private respondent's candidature under disabled category
Issues
Whether a candidate who applied as General category and did not claim disability can later seek consideration under disabled quota
Whether High Court was justified in applying PWD Act provisions despite candidate's failure to claim disability in application
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that private respondent did not claim disability in application and participated as General candidate; unfilled reserved seat was filled by General candidate as per rules
Private respondent argued that she had disability certificate and should be considered under PWD Act; High Court's order was sympathetic and in line with object of Act
Ratio Decidendi
A candidate who applies as a General category candidate and does not claim disability status in the application cannot later seek consideration under the disabled category after the selection process is complete. Recruitment rules require strict compliance, and the candidate is estopped from changing category after participating in the selection.
Judgment Excerpts
the private respondent herein had responded to the said Notification but filed the application indicating her category as 'General' and in the column provided for indication of the claim under the Differently Abled Category had mentioned 'No'.
the High Court was of the view that even though a mistake was committed by the candidate, the representation submitted by her subsequently ought to have been considered sympathetically
we do not find it necessary to advert more in detail to the said provisions since in the instant case it is not as if no reservation for Differently Abled Persons was made
Procedural History
Private respondent filed writ petition DBCWP No.692 of 2017 before Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur. High Court allowed writ petition on 04.05.2017. Appellants filed SLP (Civil) No.18973 of 2017 before Supreme Court, which was converted into Civil Appeal No.6696 of 2019.
Acts & Sections
- Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995: 2(b)-(e), (o), (p), (t), 18-32, 33, 36
- Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010:
