K SATHYA NARAYANAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has sought for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the Memorandum dated 23.03.2009, issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Assistant Medical Officer (Siddha) in the post reserved for him and grant him all benefits.

(2.) THE petitioner is a physically challenged person, suffering from 45% disability in his leg. THE petitioner secured a Bachelor's degree in Siddha Medicine and Surgery (BSMS) during 1998 and subsequently, obtained an M.D. in Siddha Medicine during 2002. THE petitioner had registered both his qualifications with the professional employment exchange. THE TNPSC during March 2004, notified 47 posts of Assistant Medical Officer (Siddha). After the notification was issued by the TNPSC, it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that 35% reservation for physically handicapped, was not made available for Group-A & Group-B posts in Tamil Nadu Government Service. Since this was against the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. THE petitioner filed two writ petitions before this Court being W.P.No.21078 of 2004 and W.P.No.21079 of 2004, challenging the proviso to Rule 22 of the Tamil Nadu State Subordinate Service Rules and for a direction to give 3% reservation for physically disabled persons and the other writ petition for direction upon the respondents, to consider the petitioner for the said post.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the TNPSC, by relying upon the counter affidavit, submitted that the Commission issued notification, dated 04.03.2004 and invited applications from candidates for filling up 47 vacancies, which was increased to 58, at the time of selection, at the instance of the Government. THE petitioner applied for the said post and he claimed concession under the physically handicapped - ortho category. It is admitted that the petitioner filed a writ petitions, to declare the proviso to Rule 22(aa) of the General Rules, excluding the applicability of reservation for physically disabled persons to the Executive post in Group A & Group B as ultra vires and to provide 3% reservation for physically handicapped in the post of Assistant Medical Officer (Siddha) and consider the case of the petitioner. It is further submitted that though an interim direction was issued, to keep one post vacant and 3% reservation for physically handicapped is made applicable, yet the petitioner cannot aspire since the relevant turn would be for SC Blind category as per the roster. THE learned counsel further submits that the TNPSC Bulletin No.4, dated 16.02.2005, showed that the post in 77th turn was reserved for the petitioner, which was as per the interim direction issued by this Court and ultimately, the writ petition was disposed of on 11.03.2008, to consider the case of the petitioner against the post reserved for physically disabled, if he is otherwise found eligible. THErefore, it is contended that the Commission examined the matter and found that the petitioner is not eligible to be selected, since as per the Rules in vogue, the physically handicapped turn arisen between the 24th turn (second rotation) to 81st turn (second rotation), is 76th turn in the second rotation, which is a SC turn. THErefore, it is contended that the petitioner cannot be selected. Further, it is submitted that the petitioner is not the only contender under the said category and there are three more physically handicapped Ortho candidates, in the ranking list above the writ petitioner.