The Supreme Court has recently granted two more weeks’ time to the Centre to file its response on a plea by a woman IRS officer who was unable to secure a place in IAS services despite a 2nd rank in the category of physically handicapped (orthopaedic) in 2013, alleging arbitrary and discriminatory approach of Centre.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Shekhar Naphade, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that she suffers from locomotor disability. Now at that point of time, if your lordship turns to the relevant portion on page…, Indian Administrative Service, the disability which are contemplated are set out there.
ASG Aishwarya Bhati for the Centre has submitted, Our counter has not been filed due to our mistake. It has been ready for 2 months but we have not filed it. But if your Lordships call it after some time we will file it. Also, one thing that I wanted to flag is that the petitioner has said in the petition that she won’t claim any seniority. Although, I am sure when she will filed in 2018, she probably just made the statement. But this is exam of 2013, is she still serious about pursuing this without seniority?
Shekhar Naphade replied, “Yes, she is.”
ASG Aishwarya said, in that case, please let us file our counter on record.
Shekhar Naphade said, there is one thing that I want to point out. In 2014 notification which I have annexed, there are some typographical error, we will replace that with a proper notification.
Also Read: Accused in Bulli Bai app, Sulli Deals app cases get bail on humanitarian grounds
The bench led by Justice Indira Banerjee recorded in its order,
“leave to rectify the typographical errors in the 2014 notification is granted. Time to file counter affidavit is extended by two weeks. Rejoinder to be filed within two weeks thereafter. The matter to be listed for final disposal on 26.04.2022.”
Shekhar Naphade said, In the meanwhile, the opposite Counsel should explore the afore possibility of accommodating her. Her career is excellent, there is no blemish in all these years of her service. I have succeeded in the competitive examination.
Justice Indira Banerjee said, yes, she is in the Indian Revenue Service, is it that she is not in service?
Also Read: Supreme Court agrees to hear plea against exemption to Kodavas for owning arms without licence
Shekhar replied, no no, she is in service.
Justice Indira Banerjee- than, that is also class 1 service.
Shekhar Naphade pointed out but the petitioner will make her case because there is not a change in constitutional prospective now. In the recent judgement of this court reported in 2021 that equality…
Justice Indira Banerjee said, yes we will hear you…
According to the plea, the petitioner is a physically handicapped woman who had faced a lot of challenges being from a very humble background and hails from a small village in Odisha. She said, her goal was to become an IAS officer, and she had applied for the Civil Services Examination in 2013, and cleared the same by securing 2nd rank in the category of Physically Handicapped (orthopaedic) and that year there was a seat reserved for IAS category of (orthopaedic) physically challenged and the same was widely reported in media. However, due to arbitrary allocation and discriminatory approach of the Respondents, the she could not achieve her dream of being an IAS officer.
Also Read: Petition in Supreme Court challenges delimitation of assembly seats in Jammu and Kashmir
In her plea, she has alleged that UPSC taking a lenient approach and relaxing the eligibility criteria with respect to physically handicapped persons. She said, in 2013, various seats were reserved for the persons with disability and in each establishment functional classification was made, based on the disabilities such as OL (One leg affected), BA (Both arms affected), OA (only one arm affected) etc. However, BL(Both legs affected) was not mentioned in the functional classification for the post of IAS, but it was mentioned in the functional classification for the post of IRS.
She mentioned that physical requirement for both services were almost same. In year, 2013 the notification issued by the Centre was different from the one issued in year 2014, wherein the functional classification mentioned as BL (both legs affected) for the post of IAS and IRS. She said, that the notification in 2014 was even released prior to the declaration of results of 2013. In her plea she has stated that despite having 68% locomotor disability with BL (both legs affected) she has been attending her office in the most meticulous manner, attends and addresses conferences of professionals and other at various geographical locations and fulfils the physical requirements of IAS as per the 2013 notification.
She further alleged, she preferred for the post of IAS but she was allocated IRS and the physical requirements for both the services were almost same as like sitting, standing, writing, pulling chair etc. She has stated in her plea that another person respondent no 3/Mr. Kuldeep Sharma IAS, having lower in merit list was allocated IAS service arbitrarily and she is not claiming any seniority if appointed in IAS cadre as she was discriminated being from physically handicapped category.
Also Read: Delhi High Court rejects PIL against physical re-opening of schools
Her previous plea before the principal bench Central Administrative Tribunal was dismissed solely on the ground that case was governed as per the functional classification under the advertisement for the year 2013 which was later upheld by the Delhi High Court.
The Delhi High Court had held that,
“the petitioner had participated in the Civil Services Examination in 2013 and was allocated the cadre of Indian Revenue Services after considering her suitability in the physically disabled category as prescribed for the said examination, cannot lay a claim for being appointed in the IAS cadre by dislodging the respondent No 3. Who had participated in the CSE-2013 and was selected In the physically disabled category with a disability in one leg only because the Terms and conditions in the CSE-2014 had relaxed the functional classification of locomotor disability thereby resulting in making candidates with disability in both legs eligible for the IAS cadre.”
The present plea has been filed by AOR Sanchit Garga, and argued by Senior Counsel Shekhar Naphade. The other counsel who appeared in matter from petitioner side are Advocates Harish Surana, Deepali Sharma and Aishwarya Dash.
Case Name- Sarika Jain v. The Union of India