- (1.) We have heard Shri K.K. Venugopal, learned Attorney General for India in support of the defence put up by the contemnors Nos. 2 and 3. The present Contempt Petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the directions contained in the order of this Court dated 8th October, 2013 passed in Civil Appeal No.9096 of 2013[2013(4) S.C.T. 807 : (2013) 10 SCC 772]. The issue relates to the question as to whether reservation under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1955 Act") would be available in cases of promotion to disabled persons.
(2.) Learned Attorney General may be correct in his assertion that the judgment of this Court dated 8th October, 2013 passed in Civil Appeal No.9096 of 2013 does not specifically contemplate reservation in promotions for disabled persons. Learned Attorney may be equally correct in asserting that in an earlier contempt proceeding this Court had decided the issue of contempt against the petitioners.
(3.) It appear to us from the materials on record that there is subsequent judgment of this Court in Rajeev Kumar Gupta and others v. Union of India and others, 2016(4) S.C.T. 88 : 2016(5) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 75 : (2016) 13 SCC 153 wherein the view has been taken that the quota provided under the 1955 Act for disabled persons has to be provided regardless of whether the same is filled up by way of direct recruitment or promotion. In a way we will understand the decision of this Court in Rajeev Kumar Gupta (supra) to be carrying forward the law expounded by this Court in the initial judgment dated 8th October, 2013 passed in Civil Appeal No.9096 of 2013.;