IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 1113 of 2011(L)
1. BABUKUTTAN NAIR, R.S,
... Petitioner
2. SREELATHA R,
3. RAJAN.S, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAN
4. SANDHYA R, AGED 32 YEARS, W/O UNNI,
5. MOHANAN C, AGED 41 YEARS,
6. JAYAKUMAR A
7. SUJA THOMAS, AGED 38 YEARS,
8. BIJU V
9. SATHEESH KRISHNAN B,AGED 30 YEARS
10. HARI V, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.VAMANAN
11. DINSAR A.M,AGED 35 YEARS,
12. RAJENDRAN PILLAI
13. DEEPU R.S, AGED 27 YEARS,S/O.RAJMOHAN
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOLLAM 691 001
4. THE THASILDAR,
5. THE THASILDAR
6. THE THASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE,
7. THE THASILDAR, PATHANAPURAM TALUK,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.THAMBAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :20/01/2011
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)No. 1113 of 2011
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 20th day of January, 2011
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners are physically handicapped persons
who were appointed as Villagemen on provisional basis for
179 days. They apprehend termination from service on
completion of 179 days. They are aggrieved by the same.
According to them, as per Section 23 of the Persons with
Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and
Full Participation) Act, 1995, 3% of Class III and IV posts
are to be reserved for physically handicapped candidates.
But the Government has identified posts for such
reservation only from 2004 onwards and the 3% are
calculated for backlog appointments only from 2004
onwards which according to the petitioners are against the
provisions of Section 23 of the said Act. They would contend
that the Government was bound to identify these posts with
effect from 1995 and not with effect from 2004 and
W.P.(C)No. 1113 of 2011
-2-
therefore the backlog vacancies should be calculated with
effect from 1995. They would also seek a direction to the
respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners in
those backlog vacancies.
2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader
also.
3. The petitioners have not been able to satisfy me
that they have a right to be regularised in service. In the
matter of regularisation, the physically handicapped
persons cannot be treated differently from other persons.
In the matter of appointment of physically handicapped
persons also Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India
are squarely applicable. Apart from the petitioners there
are other physically handicapped persons who are eligible
to be considered in the 3% reservation quota applicable to
physically handicapped persons. If the petitioners are
regularised in the posts in which they have been appointed
temporarily, that would affect the fundamental right of
other physically handicapped persons who are also eligible
W.P.(C)No. 1113 of 2011
-3-
to be considered for appointment to those posts under
Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. As of now the
petitioners are only provisional hands and they have no
right to continue in service beyond the period for which
they have been engaged, which is the settled law on the
subject.
4. Apart from that the Government has already
declared its policy on the question of regularisation of
physically handicapped persons. Government orders issued
in this regard specifically stipulated that only persons
appointed in the temporary vacancies up to a specific date
are entitled to the benefit of regularisation. The petitioners
have admittedly been engaged provisionally subsequent to
that date fixed by the Government. As such going by the
policy of the Government also the petitioners are not
entitled to regularisation in service.
5. As regards the question as to whether the backlog
vacancies for physically handicapped persons in the 3%
quota have to be calculated from 1995 or 2004 is not
W.P.(C)No. 1113 of 2011
-4-
necessary to be considered in this writ petition insofar as
the petitioners are not entitled to regularisation as claimed
by them. Therefore that question is left open to be
considered in an appropriate case, where the vacancies
have to be computed for advice by the Kerala Public Service
Commission. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
S. SIRI JAGAN
JUDGE
//True copy//
P.A. TO JUDGE
shg/