Relaxation Of Eligibility Criteria Can Be Considered When Sufficient PwD Candidates Are Not Available For Selection In Respective Category: Karnataka High Court

The appeal before the High Court was filed against the order rejecting the appellant’s petition seeking consideration of his case under the General Merit PwD quota and appointment to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria and Justice K. V. Aravind explained, “The finding of the Learned Single Judge, that eligibility criteria cannot be compromised or altered to favor an individual contrary to the prescribed criteria, is not disputed. However, what needs to be examined in the present case is the application of this principle in the context of a candidate seeking selection under the PwD category. Such a situation has been addressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case referred to supra, where it was held that relaxation of the eligibility criteria can be considered in assessing the suitability of a candidate when sufficient PwD candidates are not available for selection in their respective category.”

Senior Advocate Dhananjay V. Joshi represented the Appellant while Advocate Rakshitha D. J. represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The appellant has been working as an Assistant at the Bengaluru Electricity Supply Company, having been appointed pursuant to a Notification dated March 7, 2015 under the category of Persons with Disability (PwD quota). The respondents subsequently issued an Employment Notification inviting applications for various posts, including the post of Assistant Accounts Officer. The appellant submitted his application for the post of Assistant Accounts Officer under the PwD category. It was the case of the appellant that, though his name was notified for the purpose of appearing in the examination, his name did not find a place in the provisional selection list.

The appellant asserted that he suffers from a disability exceeding 75% and is therefore eligible for appointment to the said post. However, the respondents issued a provisional selection list indicating that no eligible candidate was available for the post reserved for the PwD category. The appellant preferred a writ petition seeking a direction to consider his case under the General Merit PwD quota and to include his name in the final selection list for the appointment to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer. However, the same was dismissed by the Single Judge. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant approached the High Court.

Reasoning

At the outset, the Bench noted that under the 2016 Notification, a person with locomotor disability affecting one leg, one arm, or both legs is eligible for appointment under the PwD quota. As per the Bench, the distinction sought to be made by the respondents in denying the appellant’s appointment was based on the fact that the appellant suffered from locomotor disability affecting both arms, whereas the condition under the 2015 Notification was different.

On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that the appellant, despite suffering from disability affecting both arms, had already been appointed to the post of Assistant. The appellant was also eligible for promotion to the next post in due course, which is the post of Assistant Accounts Officer. While promoting the appellant to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer, no additional eligibility criteria had been prescribed. “Therefore, when the appellant is deemed eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer, it is difficult to accept that he is not eligible for direct recruitment to the same post”, it added.

Referring to the judgment in Re: Recruitment of Visually Impaired in Judicial Services (2025), the Bench said, “If the facts of the present case are examined in light of the findings and the approach suggested by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment referred to supra, it becomes evident that, while assessing the capacity and capability of a candidate, undue emphasis cannot be placed on medical or clinical issues alone. Furthermore, it is held that, when there are insufficient PwD candidates available for selection in their respective category, relaxation of the eligibility criteria may be considered in assessing the suitability of a candidate.”

The Bench also noted that the Disability Certificate certifies that the appellant suffers from a disability affecting both legs and both arms, and it also provides a functional assessment of the appellant. According to the certificate, the appellant is eligible to perform light duties, which include sitting, writing with his hands, and performing normal work with both hands. This functional assessment qualifies the appellant to be appointed as Assistant Accounts Officer. “Thirdly, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, if there is no other eligible candidate under the PwD quota available in the respective category, the eligibility criteria may be relaxed. Upon such relaxation, the appellant would be eligible for the post of Assistant Accounts Officer”, the Bench stated.

“In light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to supra, the assessment of suitability must not be based solely on the medical certificate, but also on the functional assessment of the candidate”, it further mentioned. Thus, setting aside the order of the Single Judge, the Bench held the appellant to be eligible for the post of Assistant Accounts Officer under the reservation for persons with disabilities.

Cause Title: Anil Kumar S. B. v. The Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (Case No.: WRIT APPEAL No.1673 OF 2024)

Appearance:

Appellant: Senior Advocate Dhananjay V. Joshi, Advocate Swaroop S.

Respondent: Advocates Rakshitha D. J., Likith R. Prakash

Click here to read/download Order