Brief Facts:
The Appellant applied for the post of Police Constable (Police Protector) in Unarmed Police
Constable category through advertisement. However, the Appellant even being eligible was not appointed on the ground of colour blindness and thereby declared unfit for the post. Aggrieved by such disqualification, he filed a present petition to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order or direction against the respondent for setting aside and quashing the order on the ground of medical certificate dated 05.02.2016, and therefore direct respondent to recruit him for the post.
Appellant’s Arguments:
The counsel submitted before the court that there were instances of colour blindness is not ground for disqualification for the candidate which was otherwise eligible for the post of Unarmed Police Constable (Police Protector). Moreover, the appellant belonging to Scheduled tribes and possessed qualification but could not approach the Court promptly as he resides in a remote area. However, when it came into his knowledge that the court had in earlier occasion approved such petitions.
Further, criteria for disqualification rest only upon colour blindness but otherwise all other requirements have been fulfilled and thereby learned Single Judge has erroneously dismissed the petition on technical approach towards impugned order. Therefore, the court was prayed to grant relief as given in petition and set aside/ quash the order.
Respondent’s Arguments:
The counsel submitted before the court that the delay in approaching court has rightly resulted in the dismissal of the petition by a learned Single Judge. Further, the rejection letter dated 22.03.2016 was not challenged at that time and therefore the order passed on 10.08.2020 was not erroneously but otherwise rightly approached.
Court’s Observation:
The court observed that there are a large number of cases in which contention relating to disqualification for being appointed for the post on the ground of colour blindness has been challenged. The court was of the opinion that there are instances in which the court discarded the issue about the delay in instituting a petition can result in the dismissal of the petition. The court after considering the present case formed the opinion that the Appellant shall not be disqualified on the ground colour blindness if found qualified. Moreover, the order passed by the learned Single Judge not contested and examined issues related to several such orders.
Court’s Decision:
The court held that impugned orders passed by the learned Single Judge deserve to be set aside and quashed. Further, respondent authority directed to consider the appointment of the Appellant even though colour blindness and other grounds are satisfied for the post. The appointment shall be taken within the period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of writ and all benefits which are extended to other similar petitions must be granted to the present appellant.
Click here to view the judgment.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
