Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M. Ponniah, who suffers from locomotive disability due to polio, filed a writ petition challenging the notification dated 01.05.2013 issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu for direct recruitment of District Judges (Entry level). The petitioner contended that the notification did not provide for 3% reservation for Persons with Disabilities (PwD) as mandated under Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The petitioner had earlier filed W.P.(MD) No. 1691 of 2011 challenging a similar notification dated 24.06.2010, which was dismissed by a Division Bench on 11.03.2011 with a direction to ensure reservation for PwD in the next selection. In the present petition, the court noted that the selection process pursuant to the 2013 notification had already been completed. The court observed that while the constitutional mandate requires reservation for PwD, it was not an appropriate case to disturb the selections already made. The court dismissed the writ petition but directed the respondents to ensure proper representation of PwD category in the next selection for District Judges (Entry level).
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Reservation for Persons with Disabilities - Section 33 of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 - The petitioner challenged the notification dated 01.05.2013 for recruitment of District Judges (Entry level) on the ground that no reservation was provided for PwD category. The court held that while the constitutional mandate requires reservation, the selection process had already been completed and it was not appropriate to disturb the selections already made. The court directed that in the next selection, proper representation for PwD category shall be ensured. (Paras 1-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned notification dated 01.05.2013 for direct recruitment of District Judges (Entry level) is illegal for not providing 3% reservation for Persons with Disabilities under Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995.
Final Decision
The writ petition was dismissed. The court directed the respondents to ensure proper representation of persons in the PwD category in the next selection for District Judges (Entry level) in compliance with the constitutional mandate and the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995.
Law Points
- Reservation for Persons with Disabilities
- Section 33 of Persons with Disabilities Act 1995
- Constitutional mandate for PwD reservation
- Non-interference with completed selections
Case Details
Dr. Anita Sumanth, Mummineni Sudheer Kumar
Mr. Nambi Aarooran for M/s. S. Ajmal Associates (for petitioner), Mr. P. Anandakumar (Government Advocate for R1 & R2), Mr. P.K. Rajagopal (for R3)
The Chief Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu; The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Public (Special A) Department; The Registrar General, Madras High Court
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India challenging a notification for direct recruitment of District Judges (Entry level) for not providing reservation for Persons with Disabilities.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought quashing of the impugned notification dated 01.05.2013 and a direction to issue a fresh notification indicating the number of vacancies earmarked for physically challenged persons with 3% reservation under Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995.
Filing Reason
The petitioner, a person with locomotive disability, was aggrieved that the notification for recruitment of District Judges did not provide any reservation for Persons with Disabilities as mandated by law.
Previous Decisions
The petitioner had earlier filed W.P.(MD) No. 1691 of 2011 challenging a similar notification dated 24.06.2010, which was dismissed on 11.03.2011 with a direction to ensure reservation for PwD in the next selection.
Issues
Whether the impugned notification dated 01.05.2013 for recruitment of District Judges (Entry level) is illegal for not providing 3% reservation for Persons with Disabilities under Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the notification violated the constitutional mandate and Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 by not providing 3% reservation for PwD.
The respondents submitted that the selection process had already been completed and it was not appropriate to disturb the selections already made.
Ratio Decidendi
While the constitutional mandate and Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 require reservation for PwD, the court declined to disturb the completed selection process but directed compliance in future selections.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner is affected by Polio from the hip downwards, and suffers from locomotive disability.
The Writ Petitions were thus dismissed making it clear that there shall be a provision for reservation of PwD in fulfillment of the constitutional mandate in the immediate next vacancy of District Judges subject to availability and suitability of the candidate.
The present Writ Petition assails the selection of District Judges (Entry level) pursuant to Notification dated 01.05.2013 (2013 Notif)
Procedural History
The petitioner filed W.P.(MD) No. 1691 of 2011 challenging G.O.Ms.No.16 dated 05.01.2011 for not providing PwD reservation, which was dismissed on 11.03.2011 with a direction to ensure reservation in the next selection. Subsequently, the petitioner filed the present writ petition on 01.05.2013 challenging the 2013 notification on similar grounds.
Acts & Sections
- Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995: Section 33
- Constitution of India: Article 226
