RASHEED AHAMED P. Vs. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these writ petitions, the issue pertains to the selection of Assistant Professors in various subjects as per notification dtd. 31/12/2019 (Ext.P1 in W.P(C) No.25602/23 and hereinafter referred to as Ext.P1). Total number of posts notified as per Ext.P1 was 63. As per Sec. 6(2) of Calicut University Act, in making appointments to the teaching and non teaching posts in the University, the provisions as per Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Rule 14 and the provisions of Rules 15, 16, 17 and 17A of the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958 (KS&SSR) shall be Mutatis mutandis applicable.

(2.) As per the provisions in the KS&SSR, a roster for the purpose of reservation has to be maintained for various communities elgible for the same. Exhibit P3 in W.P(C)No. 25602/23 is the amendment brought to the Rule 15 Part II to KS&SSR which contains the roster. As per the provisions contained therein, a roster with 100 points is to be maintained and the same has to be followed for making appointments against the vacancies earmarked for open competition and the reserved categories of SC/ST and Other backward communities.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioners is that, despite the aforesaid statutory stipulation, the respondent University carried out selections based on Ext.P1, by creating additional three roster points, namely, 1A, 26A and 51A, for the physically disabled candidates and filled up the vacancies based on the same. This additional slots were created by the University for implementing the statutory reservation for persons with disabilities as contemplated under Sec. 34 of The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act), which provided for 4% reservation for such persons.