Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8344 of 2009 ====================================================== Ram Narayan Rai, son of Late Jaya Nath Rai, resident of village – Nat, P.O. – Umarpur, P.S. – Industrial Area, Buxar, District - Buxar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar, through the District Magistrate, Buxar 2. The Hon'ble Minister, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. The Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 5. The Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 6. The District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Buxar 7. The District Education Officer, Buxar .... .... Respondent/s
Legal Reasoning
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Singh Mr. Bipin Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. D.K. Sinha, AAG-II ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL ORDER *************** 10. 18.03.2013 Petitioner was a claimant for appointment as a Teacher in Secondary School under Zila Parishad, Buxar on a hearing impaired category. Since he has not been appointed by the respondents, he moved the District Teachers' Employment Appellate Tribunal by filing a case, which was registered as Appeal No. 1 of 2009. Matter was heard by the Tribunal. The Tribunal did not find any infirmity in non-selection of the petitioner, because it was the stand of the respondents that though there is reservation of posts for physically handicapped, but in terms of the notification or the circular, issued by Patna High Court CWJC No.8344 of 2009 (10) dt.18-03-2013 2/5 the Department of HRD now Education Department, reservation for the physically handicapped category is provided horizontally and the roster point so fixed for giving benefit of reservation for such candidates are roster point 1, 34 and 67. Since the roster point of the present petitioner fell at a place, which was reserved for a scheduled caste candidate, appointment of the petitioner under the physically handicapped category, who admittedly belongs to the unreserved category cannot be made. Reservation has to be made available to the same category of persons for whom the roster point was fixed. The Tribunal has rejected the claim of the petitioner after verifying the records, holding that the opening if at all which the petitioner was looking for was not available at the roster point which was reserved for a scheduled caste and since the petitioner does not belong to the scheduled caste category, even though physically handicapped, he could not be appointed. Rejection of the claim of petitioner is the reason for filing the present Writ Application. Counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of the Court to the total number of vacancies available which has been indicated in Annexure – A to the counter Patna High Court CWJC No.8344 of 2009 (10) dt.18-03-2013 3/5 affidavit filed on behalf of respondent-State as well as the general circular issued by the Department of Personnel and General Administration, dated 05.01.2007, contained in Annexure- D and the provisions, especially in paragraph 8, 10 and 13 thereof. Petitioner is harping on the fact that there cannot be a reservation roster-wise for physically handicapped category. That is what has been talked about in paragraph 10 of the circular contained in Annexure- D. Therefore, the findings given by the Tribunal against him in this regard or the stand of the State is a misplaced kind of finding. He further adds that there are atleast 13 posts of unreserved category candidates which are available under Social Science subject. The total figure of 109 has been shown for various Teachers and petitioner ought to have been accommodated or fitted into the vacancies under the unreserved category. The stand taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner does not seem to be correct in view of the fact that the circular contained in Annexure-D or other clarificatory circulars, which are available on record, has to be read in entirety. It has to be understood in the context under which provision for physically handicapped candidates by way of 3 per cent Patna High Court CWJC No.8344 of 2009 (10) dt.18-03-2013 4/5 reservation is required to be given by the State as an obligation created under the 1995 statute. The circular of the State Government contained in Annexure- D clearly certifies that reservation of the kind to the extent of 3 per cent for physically handicapped is not available vertically. It is a horizontal reservation which has been made for physically handicapped candidates and they have to be accommodated against roster point where reservation for a particular category of caste has been created. Paragraph 10 of the circular, which the petitioner is relying on, has to be read in conjunct with the previous provisions and what is being urged will amount to providing vertical reservation irrespective of the roster position, which cannot be the case of the petitioner. The stand of the State in the counter affidavit as well as supplementary counter affidavit is that the matter was closely examined by the District Magistrate of Buxar. The original records were produced before the Tribunal. It has emerged from perusal of the same which has also been annexed in the present Writ Application that the roster point where the petitioner could have got the opening under the physically handicapped category was reserved for a scheduled caste candidate. That is Patna High Court CWJC No.8344 of 2009 (10) dt.18-03-2013 5/5 why one Dhanjee Bharati, belonging to the scheduled caste category, came to be appointed who also happens to be physically handicapped. The roster point where the Social Science subject fell, fell in the lap of reservation for a scheduled caste and since petitioner could be given an opening only horizontally and not vertically he could not be accommodated on the post reserved for scheduled caste though he belongs to the unreserved category, despite being physically disabled. The findings being what they are, the Tribunal has not committed any error in coming to the conclusion and giving the reasons for petitioner’s non-selection. Writ Application is dismissed, as the Court is satisfied with the reasons so provided are not erroneous or contrary to the records as such. SKM/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)