While observing that the work of a Pharmacist is not confined to sitting on a chair, rather he is required to do physical work such as giving first aid to an injured person, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has upheld the denial of appointment to a candidate with 50% locomotor disability against the post of Pharmacist.

The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a direction to the respondents to select and appoint him to the post of Pharmacist (Allopathy) on a contract basis as per batch-wise seniority under the SC category with PWD.

The Single Bench of Justice Sandeep Sharma held, “Since work of Pharmacist is not confined to sitting on the chair, rather one being Pharmacist is required to do physical work, such as of giving first aid to the injured person in Pharmacy Center or Primary Health Centers and on some occasions, they are also required to travel to the house of ill person, coupled with the fact that Medical Board constituted by this Court, which is an expert body, has not found petitioner fit for the job of Pharmacist, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents while denying him the appointment to the post of Pharmacist.”

Advocate Narender Singh Thakur represented the Petitioner, while Additional Advocate General Rajan Kahol represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The respondent department had advertised 17 posts of Pharmacist (Allopathy) under various categories of Persons with Disabilities (PWD). Out of 17 posts, seven posts were advertised for the category of Ortho Impaired. Petitioner, who had completed his Degree in B. Pharmacy in the year 2005 and had registered himself with the Pharmacy Council of Himachal Pradesh, applied for the post of Pharmacist (Allopathy) under the category of Ortho Impaired. The name of the petitioner was sponsored by the employment exchange for the post of Pharmacist (Allopathy) against the category of PWD.

The petitioner attended the counselling as per schedule at Shimla; however, the respondent directed the petitioner to appear before the Medical Board. The Board issued a disability certificate in favour of the petitioner with 50% Locomotor Disability. The petitioner approached the High Court with the grievance that he was not offered an appointment, despite his being eligible under the category of PWD (Locomotor) under the SC category.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the Petitioner has 50% Locomotor Disability with left homonymous heminopia (left facial weakness), Left Hemiparesis and right temporal craniectomy. As a result thereof, he was not fit for the job of Pharmacist for want of his proper standing and walking.

The Bench referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in Syed Bashir-Ud-Din Qadri Vs. Nazir Ahmed Shah and Others, (2010) wherein it has been held that persons with disability have a right to live a life of purpose and human dignity and cases pertaining to disability are required to be handled with sensitivity and not with bureaucratic apathy.

The Bench was of the view that once the petitioner, who though was suffering from 50% locomotor disability, was not found fit for the job of Pharmacist by the Medical Board taking note of Notification issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, no illegality could be said to have been committed by the respondents in denying appointment to the petitioner against the post of Pharmacist. The Bench noticed that the Government of Himachal Pradesh had identified the post of Pharmacist (Allopathy) and prescribed the physical requirements and categories of disabilities suitable for the post.

The Bench further asserted, “In the opinion of this Court, role of a judge does not require physical exertion or mobility of the kind essential to a pharmacist’s work and can be effectively performed with the aid of reasonable accommodation and staff assistance.” Thus, the Bench dismissed the Petition.

Cause Title: Sajil Kumar v. State of H.P. (Neutral Citation: 2025:HHC:37386-DB)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocate Narender Singh Thakur

Respondent: Additional Advocate General Rajan Kahol, Deputy Advocates General Ravi Chauhan, Anish Banshtu, Rajesh Kumar Parmar

Click here to read/download Order



Himachal Pradesh High CourtJustice Sandeep Sharma

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.