Case Note & Summary
The appellant, an aspirant for the post of Ophthalmic Assistant in the Tamil Nadu Medical Department, challenged the rejection of her candidature. She participated in the selection process conducted by the Medical Service Recruitment Board (MRB) pursuant to a recruitment notification dated 17.02.2023. The notification reserved 4% of posts for differently abled candidates with orthopaedically physically handicapped locomotor disability of the lower limb between 40% and 70%, as per G.O.(Ms) No.3, Health and Family Welfare Department, dated 06.01.2016. The appellant applied claiming to belong to that category, but her disability pass-book issued by the Government indicated 65% hearing impairment, not an orthopaedic disability. Additionally, she applied under the MBC de-notified category, where the cut-off marks were 58.24 for general and 59.51 for women, but she secured only 57.75 marks. Consequently, her candidature was not considered. She filed a writ petition (W.P.No.2708 of 2026) before the High Court, which was dismissed on 27.01.2026, with a modification order on 27.02.2026. The writ court found that she did not apply for the DAP category and did not meet the cut-off marks. Aggrieved, she filed the present writ appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent seeking to set aside the writ court's orders. The main legal issue was whether the rejection of her candidature was arbitrary and contrary to the recruitment notification and government orders. The respondents argued that under the governing government order, only orthopaedically disabled persons with lower limb disability were eligible, and the appellant's certificate showed hearing impairment, which disqualified her. The Division Bench of the High Court, after examining the notification and the appellant's application and certificate, held that the appellant failed to produce the relevant certificate establishing her eligibility under the differently abled category as notified. It noted that her marks were below the cut-off for the MBC de-notified category. Finding no infirmity in the writ court's decision, the appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Recruitment - Disability Reservation - Government Orders and Cut-Off Marks - The recruitment notification for Ophthalmic Assistant reserved posts for differently abled candidates with orthopaedic locomotor disability of lower limb between 40% and 70%. The appellant, though claiming such disability, produced a certificate showing 65% hearing impairment, thus not satisfying the required disability classification. She also failed to meet the cut-off marks in the MBC denotified category. Held, the rejection of her candidature was justified and the writ court's order dismissing the petition was upheld. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant was entitled to appointment as Ophthalmic Assistant under the differently abled category despite securing marks below the cut-off and holding a disability certificate for hearing impairment instead of orthopaedic disability as required by the recruitment notification.
Final Decision
Writ appeal dismissed; no order as to costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Strict compliance with disability reservation criteria
- Proof of disability category required as per government order
- Cut-off marks determine selection eligibility
- No interference in writ appeal absent legal infirmity
