SARITHA S.BABU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the non consideration of the petitioner for appointment, despite the petitioner having obtained second rank in the list prepared for the differently abled persons, as per Ext.P3. The petitioner is an orthopaedically handicapped candidate, who has been placed at the second rank in the list of differently abled persons. The petitioner contends that despite vacancies having arisen, which are reserved to such disabled candidates the petitioner has not been advised for appointment. A three percent of the vacancies are ear -marked for such candidates under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunity, Protection of Rights and full Participation) Act 1995 (herein after referred to as 'the Disabilities Act').

(2.) The Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC) has filed a counter affidavit, in which it has been specifically noticed that the reservation applicable to physically handicapped persons is 3% and as per the rules of rotation on a roster of 100 points, the turns alloted for physically handicapped candidates are at points 33, 66 and 99. The implementation of the said reservation policy is in such a manner that 33rd and 66th vacancies are set apart respectively for blind and deaf candidates and the 99th vacancy is set apart for the physically handicapped (ortho category).

(3.) Ninety vacancies were notified for appointment half of which were to be made respectively on direct recruitment and from in -service candidates. Hence only one vacancy is reserved in the first 45 to the disabled. The present recruitment to the post of cashier/clerk is to a post not identified for the blind candidates. The first post hence is interchanged in favour of the deaf candidates and so would the second post also be reserved for the deaf candidates which has to go to an in -service candidate. The petitioner, who is orthopaedically handicapped will have to wait till the 99th vacancy arises and herein the petitioner is only the second rank holder.