AMAR DAS BAIRAGI Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Alok Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner before this Court an Orthopaedically handicapped person has filed this present writ petition being aggrieved by the action of the respondents in rejecting an application preferred by the petitioner for appointment to the post of peon on account of his being over age. The contention of the petitioner is that he is a member of other backward class category and is also more than 40% orthopaedically handicap. He has further stated that he was appointed on the post of peon on daily wages on 16-12-1992 in the services of Town Improvement Trust and later on the Town Improvement Trust was abolished and his services were merged into Municipal Council, Guna and the petitioner became an employee of the Municipal Council Guna. The petitioner has further stated that the State of M. P. has issued a policy for discontinuing the services of daily wagers appointed after 31-12-1988 and the case of the petitioner was also reviewed by the Municipal Council, Guna in the light of the circular issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh, his services have been put to an end w.e.f. 13-1-2000 by the Municipal Council, Guna. The petitioner has further stated that an advertisement was issued as contained in Annexure P/7 by the Municipal Council, Guna inviting applications for the post of peon and the petitioner being a member of other backward class category has also submitted an application and he was directed vide letter dated 14-6-2007 to appear before the Chief Municipal Officer along with all relevant documents. The petitioner as directed by the Chief Municipal Officer, appeared before the Chief Municipal Officer along with his caste certificate, his medical certificate, however his candidature has turned down as he was more than 40 years of age. The petitioner's solitary grievance is that he is a physically disabled person and is entitled for age relaxation of 10 years by virtue of the policy decision of the State Government as contained in Annexure P/ll dated 7-7-1988 and therefore, the respondents in all fairness should have considered the candidature of the petitioner on merits. Learned counsel for the petitioner has informed that this Court while issuing notice on 4-1-2007, has directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to participate in the process of selection and the Municipal Council has permitted the petitioner to participate in the process of selection, however, the result has not been declared by the Municipal Council in the light of the interim order passed by this Court on 4-1-2007. The petitioner has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner by granting age relaxation in the matter by virtue of the policy decision of the State Government.

(3.) A reply has been filed on behalf of the Municipal Council Guna and the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 is that the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 is not applicable in case of Municipal Council, Guna and therefore, the question of granting age relaxation does not arise. It has also been stated that the upper age limit as provided in the advertisement was 40 years and as the petitioner was aged about 42 years he was held to be ineligible for the post of peon. The respondent has prayed for dismissal of the present writ petition.