Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
NANDKUMAR NARAYANRAO GHODMARE
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT30/10/1995
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
HANSARIA B.L. (J)
CITATION:
1995 SCC (6) 720 JT 1995 (8) 156
1995 SCALE (6)198
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Admittedly, the appellant is handicapped because of
colour blindness. He was admittedly selected by the Public
Service Commission but appointment could not be made on
account of his handicap. When the matter came up on March
27, 1995, this Court while issuing notice passed order as
follows:-
"Petitioner should also give the nature
of the duties he has to perform and
whether his colour blindness would
interfere with the discharge of his
duties. Respondents also would state in
this behalf of their stand. If it is
needed, they can also send the
petitioner for medical examination by an
expert Government Ophtholmogist or
Board."
Despite the order, the Government took no action in that
behalf. On the other hand, the appellant had filed on May 2,
1995 an affidavit detailing that as per the information he
had secured, there were 35 posts in the Department and only
five posts required perfect vision without colour blindness.
Those five posts are mentioned in the affidavit. In other
posts, colour blindness was not an impediment for him to be
appointed.
Under these circumstances, we deem it just and proper
that the Government should consider the case of the
appellant to be appointed to any of the posts of
Agricultural Officer of Class II Service other than the 5
posts mentioned by him his affidavit. The appellant should
enclose a copy of this affidavit filed before us to the
Department concerned for considering his case. Appointment
should be made within two months from the date of the
receipt of this order.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
The appeal is allowed. No costs.