SECRETARY Vs. MANISH VAISHNAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the order dated 5.7.2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short "the CAT") in Original Application No. 302/2012 "Manish Vaishnav vs. Union of India" by which the CAT has allowed the Original Application filed by the respondent -applicant and has directed the petitioner -Border Roads Development Board to give suitable appointment to the respondent -applicant. So far as the consequential benefits are concerned, the CAT directed the petitioner -Border Roads Development Board to consider the claim of the respondent -applicant, after giving him appointment, on the representation to be submitted by him and after the decision on the respondent -applicant's representation, if any grievance remains, the respondent -applicant may approach the Tribunal, if he so desires.

(2.) THE respondent -applicant is a differently abled person. According to the certificate of the Medical Board issued by the Disability Medical Board, Govt. Hospital, Nagaur, the respondent suffers from locomotor disability of weakness in one leg. As per the medical certificate dated 6.11.2009, renewed on 6.2.2010, he suffers from disability category "OL" i.e. one leg affected with weakness, indicating the degree of disability assessed at 60%. He appeared in the Engineering Services Examination, 2009 held by the U.P.S.C. in the reserved quota of physically handicapped persons and passed the examination successfully, securing 204th rank at S. No. 34 in the list. In the selection, certain posts were reserved for physically handicapped persons.

(3.) AFTER success in the written examination, he was called for medical examination. The Medical Board, especially constituted for the Engineering Services Examination, 2009 by the Ministry of Railways, New Delhi, for finding out the suitability of the physically challenged candidates for various services, certified the respondent -applicant to be fit only for specified vacancy reserved for physically impaired and found his appointment permissible under relaxed criterion for physically handicapped functions B/L. The relevant part of the Medical Board report and the findings are quoted as below: