Karnataka High Court
Afreen vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 16 January, 2023
Bench: Sreenivas Harish Kumar, T G Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.G.SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
WRIT APPEAL No.200041/2022 (S-RES)
Between:
Afreen W/o Suleman Patel
Age: 25 Years,
Occ: Housewife R/o Chigaralli
Tq. Jewargi
Dist. Kalaburagi-585 310
...Appellant
(By Sri B. Bhimashankar, Advocate)
And:
1. The State of Karnataka
Represented by its Secretary
Dept. of Women and Child Development
Vikas Soudha, Bengaluru-560 001
2. The Deputy Commissioner
Kalaburagi-585 102
3. Assistant Director of Social Welfare Officer
Jewargi, Tq. Jewargi, Dist. Kalaburagi-585 310
2
4. The Chief Executive Officer
Zilla Panchayath, Kalaburagi-585 102
5. The Deputy Director Dept. Women and Child
Development, Kalaburagi-585 102
6. The Child Development Project Officer
Jewargi, Tq. Jewargi,
Dist. Kalaburagi-585 310
7. The Executive Officer, Taluka Panchayath
Jewargi, Tq. Jewargi
Dist. Kalaburagi-585 310
8. Taluka Health Officer Jewargi
Tq. Jewargi, Dist. Kalaburagi-585 310
9. The Social Welfare Officer Chittapur
Member of Selection Committee
Jewargi, Tq. Jewargi, Dist. Kalaburagi-585 310
10. Smt. Sabawwa D/o Bhimanna Kavaldar
Age: 26 Years, Occ: Housewife
R/o Chigaralli
Tq. Jewargi, Dist. Kalaburagi-585 310
...Respondents
(By Sri Mallikarjun C. Basareddy, Govt. Advocate for
R1 to R3, R5 and R6;)
This Writ Appeal is filed under Section 4 of the High
Court Act, 1961, praying to set aside the order of learned
Single Judge dated 14.01.2022 passed in
W.P.No.226674/2020 consequently allow the
W.P.No.226674/2020 by quashing the order dated
3
14.08.2019 for provisional list of selection passed by the
respondent Committee consisting respondent Nos.2 to 9
produced at Annexure-G and final selection list produced at
Annexure-J.
This appeal coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this
day, SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR J., delivered the
following:
JUDGMENT
This writ appeal is filed challenging the order
dated 14.01.2022 in W.P.No.226674/2020.
2. Heard Sri Bhimashankar, learned counsel
for the appellant and Sri Mallikarjun C. Basareddy,
learned Government Advocate, who has taken notice
for respondent Nos.1 to 3, 5 and 6.
3. The appellant and the 10th respondent
applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker under
physically handicapped quota. The appellant was
provisionally selected vide proceedings dated
12.03.2018 and this was objected to by 10th
respondent. Pursuant to the objection, this court by
order dated 06.12.2021 directed the Kalaburagi
Institute of Medical Sciences, Kalaburagi to give a
report relating to the disability of the 10th respondent.
Accordingly, the Board gave a report stating that, 10 th
respondent had disability to the extent of 33%.
Therefore the learned Single Judge came to conclusion
that 10th respondent could be preferred to the
appellant for the post of Anganwadi worker.
4. Sri Bhimashankar now refers to Section
2(t) of the Person With Disabilities Act, 1995 which
defines a person with disability as a person suffering
from not less than forty percent of any disability as
certified by a medical authority. Sri Bhimashankar
submits that the appellant's disability is 14%.
Therefore when compared to the disability of 10 th
respondent, the extent of the disability of the
appellant is less. This was the reason for the learned
Single Judge to hold that 10th respondent could be
appointed to the post of Anganwadi worker. If we can
go by the definition, if 40% is the minimum criteria to
assess the disability, neither the appellant nor the 10th
respondent will become eligible for the post of
Anganwadi worker. In this view, we do not find any
infirmity in the impugned order. Therefore writ
petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
BL
