Justice Abdul Moin, Allahabad High Court
Physically Handicapped Category To Be Considered As Separate Category & Provided With Reservations: Allahabad High Court
|The Allahabad High Court considered the appeal filed by a physically handicapped person for appointment on the post of Assistant Professor under reserved quota of physically handicapped category.
The Allahabad High Court, while allowing the Writ Petition filed by a physically handicapped person, held that the physically handicapped category is to be considered as a separate category and provided with reservations.
An appeal arising out if a Writ Petition was considered by the Allahabad High Court wherein the claim of the Petitioner for appointment on the post of Assistant Professor under reserved quota of physically handicapped category has been rejected.
The Bench of Justice Abdul Moin observed, “In view of the aforesaid judgements it clearly emerges that physically handicapped category is to be considered as a separate category and provided with reservations and it is indispensable on the part of the authorities to declare separate cut off marks for physically handicapped category for each stage to ensure that those similarly placed candidates are adequately represented in service fulfilling the very purpose of reservation.”
Advocate I.M. Pandey represented the Petitioners, while Advocate Ashwani Kumar Agnihotri represented the Respondents.
Case Brief
A Writ Petition was filed seeking appointment of the Petitioner on the post of Assistant Professor (English) from the final merit list of reservation quota of physically handicapped category.
The Petitioner suffers from 100% disability of optical atrophy of both eyes and is a hundred percent permanently physically handicapped person. As per the notification issued by the State, five posts for the Assistant Professor were reserved for the physically handicapped candidates.
It was contended that a final merit list was declared in which name of the Petitioner finds place at serial number 345 having secured 127.22 marks having physically handicapped unreserved category. As per final merit list, name of the petitioner would stand at serial number 6 in terms of merit for physically handicapped candidates.
However, it was further contended that there were only five reserved posts for physically handicapped category and one candidate did not join in the allotted institution thus leaving only four persons in fray against five vacancies against physically handicapped unreserved category.
The grievance of the Petitioner was that since there were five physically handicapped unreserved vacancies against 133 posts of Assistant Professor (English) and considering non joining of one person who stood first in the said category, the name of Petitioner should have been placed in the said final merit list.
Case Analysis
The Court referred to Section 34 of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and noted, “every appropriate government shall appoint in every government establishment not less than 4% of total number of vacancies in the cadre strength in each group of posts meant to be filled with persons with benchmark disabilities.”
Further, the Court observed that physically handicapped category is to be considered as a separate category and provided with reservations and it is indispensable on the part of the authorities to declare separate cut off marks for physically handicapped category for each stage to ensure that those similarly placed candidates are adequately represented in service fulfilling the very purpose of reservation.
The Court relied on the decision of Supreme Court in Recruitment of Visually Impaired in Judicial Services (2025).
“Considering the aforesaid discussion it is thus apparent that the respondents have patently erred in law in not appointing the petitioner against fifth reserved post for physically handicapped candidates of Assistant Professor (English)”, the Court said.
The Bench issued writ of mandamus and commanded the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner on the post of Assistant Professor (English) against physically handicapped category.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition was allowed.
Cause Title: Prabhat Mishra V. State of U.P Thru. Secy. Higher Education Govt. U.P. Lko. And 2 Others ( Neutral Citation: 2025-AHC-LKO:40184)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates I.M Pandey, Harsh Vardhan Kediya, Saubhgya Mishra, Snigdha Singh
Respondents: C.S.C, Ashwani Kumar Agnihotri