PARTAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF HP & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The moot question involved in this appeal is as to whether reservation provided under Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (for short the 'Act', 1995) is available even on promotion.

(2.) Since the issue is predominantly a legal one therefore, it is not necessary to set out the facts in detail, suffice it to observe that the petitioner, after completing his Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. matriculation, was appointed as Clerk in the office of Divisional Forest Officer, Renuka Division against vacancy reserved for physically handicapped person and had filed a writ petition seeking direction to the respondent -State to grant reservation even while making promotion to the next higher post. Petition came to be dismissed by the learned writ court, giving rise to the present appeal. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case.

(3.) Sh.Sunil Mohan Goel, learned counsel for the appellant would vehemently argue that the issue involved in the appeal is no longer res integra in view of the judgment rendered by the learned Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Viklang Sang, Haryana Vs State of Haryana & ors, CWP No. 12741 of 2009, decided on 18th March, 2010, wherein it was held that that the court must adopt a liberal interpretation which advances the achievement of the object of the act and, therefore, denying reservation of 3% in promotional avenues would defeat the object of the act and at the same time would be contrary to the mandate of directive principles contained in Articles 38 and 41 of the Constitution of India.