HARSHAD GOVIND JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions filed in public interest essentially seek to highlight the plight suffered by totally blind persons due to denial of any employment opportunities to them on account of consumption of all reserved posts by the low vision candidates. The Petitions raise the issue of non-implementation of reservations provided for totally blind candidates under the provisions of Persons with Disability (Equal Opportunities, Protection and Participation) Act, 1995 (Act of 1995). The main grievance raised in both the petitions is that all the posts reserved for totally blind and low vision categories are consumed by low vision candidates. Petitioners complain that the State Government has not made any provision to ensure that totally blind candidates also secure jobs in pursuance of reservation extended to them. In PIL No. 225 of 2009, certain other grievances with regard to methodology adopted for identification of jobs/posts for blind/low vision category is also questioned.

(2.) Before proceeding further, it must be noted that the provisions of the Act of 1995 are now replaced by the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (Act of 2016). Sec. 34 of the Act of 2016 provides for reservation to persons with disabilities. Under Sec. 34 of the Act of 2016, 1% reservation is provided for persons with benchmark disabilities of blindness and low vision. Similar was the provision existed under the Act of 1995 as well. The grievance of the Petitioners is that since 1% reservation is provided for combined category of persons with benchmark disabilities of blindness and low vision, the entire reserved posts in that 1% unit are consumed only by low vision candidates and that the employers are reluctant to employ totally blind candidates, even though totally blind candidates also fall in category (a) of Sec. 34 of the Act of 2016. It is with this main grievance that the two PILs are filed to ensure that posts are separately identified within one percent reservation quota for totally blind candidates so that low vision candidates do not compete in that sub-class and totally blind candidates actually get to enjoy their pie of reservation.

(3.) We have heard Dr. Warunjikar, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner in PIL No. 75 of 2006. He would submit that the State Government has totally failed to implement provisions of both the enactments dealing with persons with disabilities i.e. Act of 1995 and 2016 especially with regard to the totally blind persons. That the data made available through various Affidavits would indicate that hardly any candidate, who is totally blind is appointed against the reservation post. That all the employers prefer low vision candidates. That totally blind candidates cannot compete with low vision candidates. That there is substantial backlog of unfilled posts in blind category throughout the departments of the State. He would submit that this Court has passed orders from time to time which led to formation of a committee, which recommended grant of priority to persons with higher degree of blindness. He would rely upon GR dtd. 18/6/2007 issued by Social Justice and Special Assistance Department of Government of Maharashtra providing for such priority. That though the GR is issued, the same is not effectively implemented resulting in gross injustice to totally blind candidates. He would therefore submit that 50% of the posts reserved for blindness and low vision category under Sec. 34(1)(a) are required to be further reserved only for totally blind candidates without permitting low vision candidates to compete for such post. That unless such special reservation is made, totally blind candidates would continue to suffer injustice.