Ability Forum

[Vic]

The Supreme Court has held that disabled persons constitute a special class and the question of making any further reservation on the basis of caste, creed or religion ordinarily for them does not arise.

While directing the Madhya Pradesh Government to reinstate the services of handicapped candidates belonging to general category, a Bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and Harjit Singh Bedi said whereas a reasonable reservation within the meaning of Article 16 of the Constitution should not ordinarily exist beyond 50 per cent, as has been held in Indra Sawhney case, reservation for women or handicapped persons would not come within its purview.

The SC order came on a special leave petition filed by some general category candidates who were selected for posts of teachers under the handicapped quota. The MP Government terminated their services after a contempt petition was filed by a disabled candidate belonging to the reserved category who was not selected for the post. The MP Government said since the selections were made on the basis of the advertisement calling applications from SC and ST candidates only as mentioned in the heading, selection made against the quota for handicapped persons, being not proper, is liable to be cancelled.

Holding the state’s view to be untenable either in law or in equity, the Bench said the state in terms of Article 16 of the Constitution may make two types of reservations — vertical and horizontal. Article 16(4) provides for vertical reservation—making special provisions for candidates belonging to backward classes—whereas Clause (1) of Article 16 provides for equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the state. The state took a policy decision to have horizontal reservation for disabled candidates with a view to fulfil its constitutional object. Handicapped candidates have not been further classified as belonging to SCs, STs or general category.

Furthermore, the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 also provides that the states are obligated to make reservations for handicapped persons. By deciding to terminate the services of selected persons the state completely lost sight of its commitment both under its own policy decision as also the statutory provision. Therefore, the services of persons terminated should be continued and they should be paid back wages as also other service benefits, the order said

Source: Newsline

_________________
Vikas

AccessAbility

The Supreme Court has held that disabled persons constitute a special class and the question of making any further reservation on the basis of caste, creed or religion ordinarily for them does not arise.

While directing the Madhya Pradesh Government to reinstate the services of handicapped candidates belonging to general category, a Bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and Harjit Singh Bedi said whereas a reasonable reservation within the meaning of Article 16 of the Constitution should not ordinarily exist beyond 50 per cent, as has been held in Indra Sawhney case, reservation for women or handicapped persons would not come within its purview.

The SC order came on a special leave petition filed by some general category candidates who were selected for posts of teachers under the handicapped quota. The MP Government terminated their services after a contempt petition was filed by a disabled candidate belonging to the reserved category who was not selected for the post. The MP Government said since the selections were made on the basis of the advertisement calling applications from SC and ST candidates only as mentioned in the heading, selection made against the quota for handicapped persons, being not proper, is liable to be cancelled.

Holding the state’s view to be untenable either in law or in equity, the Bench said the state in terms of Article 16 of the Constitution may make two types of reservations — vertical and horizontal. Article 16(4) provides for vertical reservation—making special provisions for candidates belonging to backward classes—whereas Clause (1) of Article 16 provides for equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the state. The state took a policy decision to have horizontal reservation for disabled candidates with a view to fulfil its constitutional object. Handicapped candidates have not been further classified as belonging to SCs, STs or general category.

Furthermore, the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 also provides that the states are obligated to make reservations for handicapped persons. By deciding to terminate the services of selected persons the state completely lost sight of its commitment both under its own policy decision as also the statutory provision. Therefore, the services of persons terminated should be continued and they should be paid back wages as also other service benefits, the order said

Source: Newsline

_________________
Vikas

AccessAbility

[Adverts]