WA No. 1589 of 2006 · Kerala High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
appeal is disposed of with the above observation
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Though appeal was admitted no stay was granted and an year has elapsed since the petitioner was admitted. Petitioner is now undergoing his studies in the Engineering College. In such circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with his admission. All the same, we…
Judgment
BY GOVT PLEADER SRI SANDESH RAJ RESPONDENT: PETITIONER IN THE WPC: ---------------------------------------------- DEEPU O., KUZHIKKATTIL PUTHEN VEEDU, AZHOOR,PATHANAMTHITTA, REPRESENTED BY HIS GUARDIAN, OMANAKKUTTAN. BY ADV. SRI.SIBY MATHEW SRI.A.A.MOHAMMED NAZIR THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA 1589/2006 1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN & ANTONY DOMINIC, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Writ Appeal No 1589 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated: 1st June 2007 JUDGMENT Radhakrishnan, J. Writ petition was preferred by the respondent herein seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to admit him for the Engineering Course under the quota of physically disabled candidates and for a declaration that a person having 40% disability in any of the eyes is entitled for selection under the quota physically disabled candidate and also for other consequential reliefs.
Writ petitioner was a candidate for admission to the Engineering Course. He submitted application claiming special reservation for persons with disabilities under item 18 in the application form. Along with the application he produced disability certificate obtained from the District Medical Board, Pathanamthitta in support of his claim showing that the degree and extent of disability of the petitioner is 40%. Accepting the percentage fixed under the schedule to the Workmen's Compensation Act learned single judge WA 1589/2006 2 gave direction to the Commissioner for Entrance Examination to admit the petitioner under the quota fixed for persons with physical disability and to consider the claim of the petitioner for admission to the physically disabled person. Aggrieved by the same State and the Commissioner took up the matter in appeal.
Operative part
Though appeal was admitted no stay was granted and an year has elapsed since the petitioner was admitted. Petitioner is now undergoing his studies in the Engineering College. In such circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with his admission. All the same, we are of the view that learned single judge is not justified in substituting his opinion to that of the expert body since as per the prospectus decision of the expert medical body is final as far as the candidate is concerned. The finding of the learned single judge therefore cannot be treated as a binding precedent. The writ appeal is disposed of with the above observation. Sd/- K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN Judge Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC Judge en/ [true copy] WA 1589/2006 3
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: appeal is disposed of with the above observation
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Workmen's Compensation Act.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 01 Jun 2007. The bench was K S RADHAKRISHNAN, ANTONY DOMINIC.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.