Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/12160/2007 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12160 of 2007
=========================================================
ARUNABEN
KANTILAL METHANIA (PATEL) - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SP MAJMUDAR for
Petitioner(s):1,MR
YJ PATEL for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR
SHIVANG SHUKLA, AGP for
Respondent(s) : 1
- 2.
None
for Respondent(s) : 3 -
4.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 07/05/2007
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard
learned advocate Mr. Majmudar appearing on behalf of petitioner and
learned AGP Mr. Shukla appearing on behalf of respondent ? State
Authority.
2. The
petitioner is a 40% blind candidate being a handicapped person. The
petitioner had applied for the post of Primary Teacher (Vidhya
Sahayaka). Her merits comes to 77.920%.
3. Learned
advocate Mr. Majmudar submitted that 3% reservation is must according
to the advertisement for handicapped person. Out of 3%, 1% is
available to blind candidate and according to total posts 599, at
least 1% comes to 6 posts, but, respondent has selected only 4
candidates at Page 26 and rests of the two posts are not filled up as
petitioner is at serial No.5. Therefore, present petition is filed
that proper representation has not been given to the handicapped
blind candidate and therefore, petitioner is not able to get the
appointment. In other way, learned advocate Mr. Majmudar submitted
that if 1% reservation has been properly implemented, then,
petitioner is having a chance to get appointment as a handicapped
blind person. The representation has been made by the petitioner on
26th February 2007, wherein, this contention was not
raised.
4. Therefore,
it is open for the petitioner to make detailed fresh representation
to the respondents within a period of one month from the date of
receiving the copy of the said order.
5. Learned
AGP Mr. Shukla submitted that if respondents will received such
representation form the petitioner, the same shall be considered in
accordance with law as early as possible.
6. In
view of aforesaid submissions and facts, it is directed to the
respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and
examine the grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate reasoned
order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the
date of receiving such representation from the petitioner and
communicate the same to the petitioner immediately.
7. In
view of above observations and direction, present petition is
disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits. Direct service
is permitted.
8. However,
in case, if, ultimate decision of the respondent – authority is
against the petitioner, it is open for the petitioner to challenge
the same before appropriate forum in accordance with law.
[H.K.
RATHOD, J.]
#Dave
Top