- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 13.6.2013 passed by respondent no.2 rejecting the candidature of petitioners in granting the promotion to petitioners from the post of G.P.A. to the post of A.D.O. (P) after giving them the benefit of physically handicapped quota as per the Adhiniyam of 1993 and Government Orders dated 3.2.2008 and 12.1.2011 and further prayed for direction to the respondents to grant promotion to the petitioners from the post of Gram Panchayat Adhikari to A.D.O. (P) from 13.11.2009. Brief facts giving rise to the writ petition are that the petitioner nos.1 and 2 were initially appointed as Gram Panchayat Adhikari (in short 'GPA') through direct recruitment under physically handicapped quota on 24.1.1992 and 23.12.1996 respectively and were also confirmed on the said post. It is averred that the service record of the petitioners were always unblemished.
(2.) The State Government issued a Government Order dated 3.2.2008 allowing/granting 3% reservation in direct recruitment and in promotion of service for the physically handicapped candidates. In the year 2008 the respondent authorities started processing the eligible GPA to be promoted to the post of Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat) {in short ADO (P)}. It is stated that as per the Government Order dated 10.11.1994 there is no direct recruitment for the post of ADO (P) and 100% post of ADO (P) is to be filled by GPA. It had come to the knowledge of the petitioners that seniority list of GPA are being prepared for appointment on the post of ADO (P) and confidential record of all eligible GPA in the State had been forwarded without taking into account the G.O. dated 3.2.2008 giving benefit of reservation to physically handicapped persons. As such the petitioners approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No.666 of 2009. The writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 12.1.2009 as premature with liberty to challenge the selections if the petitioners are not considered for promotion.
(3.) Thereafter, the respondent no.3 declared the list of selected candidates of ADO (P) from GPA vide order dated 13.11.2009 completely ignoring the reservation of 3% to the candidates of physically handicapped category vide G.O. dated 3.2.2008. Aggrieved against the same the petitioner had preferred Writ Petition No.66621 of 2009, which was disposed of vide order dated 8.12.2009 directing the petitioners to prefer their grievances before the respondent no.3, who will consider and pass reasoned and speaking order without any further delay. In pursuance thereof the petitioners approached to the Director (Panchayat) alongwith order of the Court dated 8.12.2009. The respondent authority i.e. Director (Panchayat) had rejected the claim of the petitioners vide order dated 2.6.2010. The petitioners challenged the said order by way of Writ Petition No.38562 of 2010, which was allowed by this Court on 15.3.2013 directing the respondents to grant the benefit of 3% reservation for physical handicapped candidates also in promotion for the post of ADO (P) and decide the claim of the petitioners. The petitioners have sent the aforesaid order to the respondent no.3 but the respondent no.3 without considering the directions given by the Court had rejected the claim of benefit of reservation of the petitioners by way of impugned order dated 13.6.2013.;