DASRATH SINGH RATNAWAT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the appointment of respondent No. 4 made vide Annexure-13 dated 03/07/1996 on the post of Teacher Grade III against the quota reserved for physical handicapped persons.

(2.) THE petitioner and respondent No. 4 both had participated in the selection process initiated by the respondent- Zila Parishad, dausa for the post of Teacher Grade III and submitted their applications against the quota reserved for handicapped persons. However, the committee found the respondent No. 4 to be orthopedically handicapped under Rules 1976 and considered him suitable for appointment against the vacancy reserved for handicapped quota and was appointed as Teacher Grade III vide order dated 03/07/1996 (Annexure-13 ). Petitioner claimed that he is also handicapped and was entitled for benefit of reservation against handicapped quota but in the reply which has been filed by the respondents, it is revealed that as per the definition of orthopedically handicapped referred under Rule 2 (c) of the Rajasthan Employment of Physically Handicapped Rules, 1976 only such persons are considered to be orthopedically handicapped who have a major physical defect or deformity which may cause an interference in normal functioning of bones, muscles and joints. The committee considered the case of the petitioner and as per certificate furnished by him only 5th finger is slightly moulded and the another one is amputated and the remaining hand is fit to perform the work and there is no bone defect. As such, he was not considered to be orthopedically handicapped in terms of Rule 2 (c) of the Rules.

(3.) AT the same time, the respondent No. 4, as per certificate issued to him under Rule 7 of the Rules of 1976 dated 27/09/1996, had a disability of more than 50% which certainly causes interference in normal functioning. The committee considered the respondent No. 4 to be orthopedically handicapped and appointed him against the reserved vacancy as Teacher Grade iii vide order dated 03/07/1996 (Annexure-13 ). A rejoinder to the reply has been filed by the petitioner but no material has been placed on record by which it can be inferred that the petitioner was a handicapped person and entitled to seek reservation against handicapped quota.