Case Summary:
Employment: Complainant
appeared for LDC Combined Examination under SC (PH-OH) category, but was not
selected despite vacancies being there in SC, PH-OH and Unreserved categories.
Respondent submitted that the cutoff for PH-OH category was 126.25 marks and
that the Complainant had only obtained 96.5 marks. Complainant contended that
another candidate with a score of 109.75 had been included in the final list so
this contention was incorrect. Respondent then submitted that this candidate
came under the PH-VH category, which had a different cutoff mark. Respondent
elaborated that persons with disabilities who did not avail of the relaxation
for their disability would be adjusted against vacancies for their respective
vertical (General, OBC, SC) categories, due to which cutoff marks may go lower.
However, no chance is expected for people with disabilities in the OH category
as they have already been filled. Respondents also submitted documentation
detailing he selection process. In light of the fact, it was ruled that the
complainant hasn’t been denied the benefit of reservation.
Order / Judgement:
In the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with
Disabilities
National
Capital Territory of Delhi
25-
D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act,
2016]
Case No. 4/1308/2016-Wel./CD/ 603-604 Dated:
30.05.2017
Case
No. 4/1485/2016-Wel/CD
In
the matter of:
Sh. Rakesh Kumar,
Ward No.-15, Naya Tola Madhopur,
Bakitiyar, Patna,
Bihar-803212. .………
Complainant
Versus
The Chairman,
Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board,
FC-18, Institutional Area,
Karkardooma, New Delhi-110092. …...…Respondent
Date of hearing:
26.05.2017
Present: None for Complainant.
Sh. Rajesh Bhatia,
Dy.Secretary and Sh. Anil Agarwal, Grade-I
on behalf of respondent.
ORDER
Sh.
Rakesh Kumar, a person with 45% locomotor disability filed a complaint dated
15.06.2016. He submitted that he
appeared in the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) Combined
Examination for LDC Post Code 48/12 under the Roll No. 20000040 under SC (PH-OH)
category. He also passed skill test and his documents were verified. However,
in the result Notice No. 391 published on 08.06.2016, his name did not appear
although 4 vacancies were reserved for PH-OH, 11 for SC and 28 were unreserved. As per the Govt. of India’s rules, he should
be given reservation in all the three quotas.
2. The complaint was taken up with
the respondent vide communication dated 19.07.2016. A copy of his complaint was also received
from the Office of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities vide letter
dated 21.07.2016 and another from Department of Social Welfare vide letter
dated 29.08.2016. One of his complaints was registered as Case No. i.e.
4/1485/2016-Wel-CD. As the subject matter in both the cases is same, this order
will dispose of both the said cases.
3. The respondent vide letter dated
22.09.2016 informed that written examination for the post code 48/12 Delhi Jal
Board, 52/12 Rajya Sainik Board & 68/12 Services Department of GNCTD was
conducted on 16.11.2014. Candidates upto 109.75 marks for UR/OBC/SC categories
were shortlisted for appearing in type writing skill test. The complainant had
applied under SC-PH(OH) category for the post of LDC in Delhi Jal Board. He obtained 96.5 marks in the written
examination. For Delhi Jal Board, cut
off marks for PH-OH category were
126.25. Since the complainant had
obtained 96.5 marks in the written examination he was not selected.
4. The complainant had submitted
another complaint dated 23.1.2016 wherein he mentioned that the Roll No. 20000005 with a score of 109.75
was included in the final merit list and hence the statement that the cut off
marks for PH-OH were 129.75, was incorrect.
5. In view of the submissions of the
complainant that the information supplied by the respondent was incorrect, a
hearing was scheduled on 26.05.2017. The
respondent vide letter dated 18.05.2017 reiterated that the cut off marks for final result under the post code
for PH-OH category were 126.25 for the post of LDC in Delhi Jal Board (Post
Code 48/12), whereas the complainant had obtained 96.5 marks in the written
examination. Therefore, he was not selected.
The respondent further clarified that the candidate bearing Roll No.
20000005 was selected under PH-VH category for which the cut off marks were different. It has
further been stated that the result of PH vacancies is being reviewed to ensure
norms of horizontal reservation as laid down in the reservation policy.
6. The representatives of the
respondent during the hearing further elaborated that the persons with
disabilities who were selected on their own merit without availing any
relaxation as a person with disability, will be adjusted against the vacancies
for their respective vertical categories i.e. General, OBC, SC. Some dossiers have also been received back
from the user Departments. Due to which
the result will need to be recast. Consequently the cut off marks are likely to
be lower. However, in case of the complainant who applied for
post code 48/12 (LDC in Delhi Jal Board) no change is expected as all the reserved vacancies for persons with
disabilities in OH category have already been filled as on date. They assured that the relevant instructions
with regard to reservation for persons with disabilities will be strictly
followed and no injustice will be done to the complainant.
7. The representatives of the
respondent also produced relevant record including all the relevant data in
respect of candidates with locomotor disability. It is observed from the record made available
that the complainant appeared at Sl.No. 40 in the list of total 45 persons with locomotor
disability (PH-OH). A separate merit list of the candidates with locomotor
disability has been drawn for all the vacancies in three post codes i.e. 48/12,
52/12 & 68/12. Thereafter, the
candidates are picked up in the order of their merit amongst the OH category
against the reserved vacancies in the post code for which they had applied. For
example the complainant who had applied only for post code 48/12, would be considered only for post code 48/12. In the said post
code- 48/12, out of 319 vacancies, 5 were reserved for OH, 6 for VH and 6 for
HH category. So the complainant at
Sl.No. 40 of the merit list has no chance to be selected.
8. In the light of the facts
mentioned above, the complainant has not been denied the benefit of reservation
in accordance with the instructions on the subject.
The matter is disposed of accordingly.
Given under my hand and the seal of the Court
this 30th day of May,2017.
(T.D. Dhariyal )
State
Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
