IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 9622 of 2009(W)
1. NELSON E.V., ERATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT
... Respondent
2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF
3. THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.BOSE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :22/05/2009
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No.9622 of 2009-W
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2009.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was an applicant for appointment to the post of
Assistant Grade II in the Calicut University. He is a physically handicapped
person. The notification in question is dated 25.3.2000 which is produced
as Ext.P1. The writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to provide
reservation for physically handicapped persons in the reservation quota of
3%. The petitioner contends that in the light of Ext.P9 Government Order,
3% vacancies in Class III and Class IV posts in Public Services will have to
be reserved for appointment from physically handicapped persons in the
light of the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities,
Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995.
2. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the University. It is clear
from the averments in the writ petition that the selection that was conducted
to the post of Assistant Grade II was the subject matter of challenge in
various writ petitions before this court. It appears that a written test was
conducted on 10.3.2001 and the University published a short list containing
562 candidates. Ultimately, a rank list was published on 14.5.2002
wpc 9622/2009 2
containing the names of 566 candidates. The said rank list contained a main
list and a supplementary list which were challenged in O.P.No.15309/2002.
This court directed the Lal Bahadur Sasthri Centre to have a revaluation of
the answer papers which was complied with. Ext.P4 produced herein is the
short list published thereafter by the University. Some of the candidates
whose names figured in the first list, filed Writ Appeal No.1451/2006
challenging the judgment in O.P.No.15309/2002. The petitioner’s claim is
based on the short list produced as Ext.P5 after the disposal of the Writ
Appeal. Subsequent disputes arose between the rival claimants in the two
lists which were ultimately adjudicated by a Division Bench of this court in
the judgment in Writ Petition No.15528/2007 and connected cases dated
6.2.2009. Therefore, the matter is now governed by the directions contained
in the said judgment.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that this court had
directed the publication of supplementary list after following the
requirements of the rules of reservation and therefore it is contended that the
claim of persons like the petitioner will also have to be governed by the
same.
4. Learned Standing Counsel for the University submits that the
claim of physically handicapped persons was not a subject matter before
wpc 9622/2009 3
this court in any of the proceedings and the directions given by the Division
Bench in the above judgment, especially after mentioning the rules of
reservation will not take in the claim for reservation made by any of the
physically handicapped candidates. A reading of the judgment shows that
what is mentioned is only about the rules of reservation, viz. reservation
provided for various communities for consideration of their claim in
accordance with the relevant rules framed by the University as per the
provisions of the Constitution.
5. In that view of the matter, the belated attempt made by the
petitioner in this writ petition to reopen the entire thing to have a reservation
in favour of physically handicapped persons, cannot be accepted. The
notification was not challenged at the relevant point of time and the
petitioner had also participated in the selection process without any demur.
Therefore, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/