Mode Of Entry In Service Is Not Relevant For Considering Promotion Of Persons With Disabilities: Supreme Court

  • Post category:Daily Judgments
  • Reading time:4 mins read

Mode Of Entry In Service Is Not Relevant For Considering Promotion Of Persons With Disabilities

Case: State of Kerala and others vs Leesamma Joseph

Coram: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R Subhash Reddy

Case No: Civil Appeal No. 59 Of 2021

Court Observation: “Source of recruitment ought not to make any difference but what is material is that the employee is a PwD at the time for consideration for promotion. The 1995 Act does not make a distinction between a person who may have entered service on account of disability and a person who may have acquired a disability after having entered the service.”

“It would be discriminatory and violative of the mandate of the Constitution of India if the respondent is not considered for promotion in the PwD quota on this pretext. Once the respondent has been appointed, she is to be identically placed as others in the PwD cadre. The anomaly which would arise from the submission of the appellant-State is apparent – a person who came in through normal recruitment process but suffers disability after joining service would on a pari materia position be also not entitled to be considered to a vacancy in a promotional post reserved for a PwD. This is the consequence if the entry point is treated as determinative of the entitlement to avail of the benefits. Source of recruitment ought not to make any difference but what is material is that the employee is a PwD at the time for consideration for promotion. The 1995 Act does not make a distinction between a person who may have entered service on account of disability and a person who may have acquired disability after having entered the service. Similarly, the same position would be with the person who may have entered service on a claim of a compassionate appointment. The mode of entry in service cannot be a ground to make out a case of discriminatory promotion.”

[doc id=6711]

Previous Posts

Award Of Lok Adalat Cannot Be Considered As An Award Of The Court Made Under Part III Of Land Acquisition Act: Bombay High Court

Law Of Limitation Only Bars Judicial Remedy, The Substantive Right Survives: Kerala High Court

Supreme Court Directs States/UTs To Strictly Implement Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act 1979

‘Legitimate Legislative Exercise’: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Laws Act 2019

Limitation Act Provisions Will Apply To Arbitration Proceedings Initiated Under Section 18(3) MSMED Act: Supreme Court Download Judgement