No separate category for physically handicapped in reservation: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court passed a judgement on 16-05-2014 in the case of Vikram Singh Chouhan vs. State of Rajasthan D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3115/2014. Dismissing a petition, A Division Bench comprising of Amitava Roy and Vijay Bishnoi concluded that there should be no separate category for the physically handicapped persons for the purpose of reservation.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
In the present case, a physically handicapped candidate who appeared for the preliminary examination of the Rajasthan Judicial Service was seeking to invoke extra-ordinary jurisdiction of the Court for violation of Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010, contending that there is an error in the decision of the examination committee in rejecting his representation, as the physically handicapped candidates construe to be a separate category independent of General/SC/ST/OBC categories under the Rules, and any omission thereof would be contravention of the Rules, professed advertisement, and Article 14 and 16 of the constitution.
The Court relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India 1992 Suppl. (3) SCC 215, where the Court clarified the concept of reservation and explained that suppose 3% of the vacancies are reserved in favor of physically handicapped persons, if he belongs to SC/ST/OBC/ women category he will be placed in that quota, so that the percentage reservations in favor of that class remains the same.
The Court held that law does not permit that there should be a separate category for physically handicapped persons for the purpose of reservation. The Court found that the petitioner’s representation has been rejected on merits by the examination committee, and suspended the challenge of the petitioner and opined that in this case the exercise of the power of judicial review is not warranted. The results of the preliminary examination cannot be faulted and the insistence for the cut-off marks for this category of candidates is ex-facie absurd and preposterous, the Court held.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a national award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY CHANDANA SHEKAR