Sabina, J. - (1.) CASE of the petitioner, in brief, is that petitioner was working as Junior Engineer in handicapped category as he was suffering disability to the extent of 48% for being deaf and dumb. The name of the petitioner was forwarded to Departmental Promotion Committee but he was not recommended for promotion whereas, respondent No. 4 was recommended for promotion. Government had issued letter that 3% posts were to be reserved in the category of handicapped persons. Vide Annexure P -2, this Court vide CWP No. 5809 of 2010 had directed the respondents to keep 3% posts for promotion for disabled persons by giving them promotions as per directions and guidelines issued by the Ministry of Personnel dated 20.11.1989. However, the case of the petitioner had not been considered for promotion in the handicapped category. Hence, the present petition.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents had erred in not promoting the petitioner in the handicapped quota. Three per cent vacancies were liable to be filled up from handicapped category. Petitioner, being deaf and dumb, came within the category of physically handicapped. The Departmental Promotion Committee had erred in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion on the basis of reservation. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee was held on 16.03.2012. In the said agenda, out of three vacant posts, two candidates belonged to general category, whereas, one belonged to handicapped category. At the relevant time, roster point Nos. 30, 31 and 32 were to be filled up. The names of senior most Junior Engineers were recommended for promotion against general category qua roster point Nos. 30 and 31. So far as the handicapped category is concerned, the Departmental Promotion Committee referred the matter to Department of Social Security, Women and Child Development. The said Department vide letter dated 15.05.2012 advised that in case roster point No. 11 had already been filled up by a person belonging to handicapped category then, the next roster point No. 40 was liable to be filled up by an employee belonging to handicapped (deaf and dumb) category. Since roster point No. 40 had not arisen, therefore, case of the petitioner could not be considered for promotion. Petitioner would be considered for promotion as and when his turn comes as per seniority list or when the roster point No. 40 ear -marked for handicapped i.e. deaf and dumb category comes up.
(3.) THUS , in the present case, although, case of three employees was sent to the Departmental Promotion Committee on account of three vacancies but the case of the petitioner could not be considered for promotion in the handicapped category as roster point had not reached for said reservation. As per the written statement filed by the State, the next roster point for handicapped category (deaf and dumb) was No. 40 and petitioner would be considered for promotion as per seniority or when roster point No. 40 is to be filled up, whichever is earlier. In view of the written statement filed by the State, no ground for interference is made out as petitioner could not be promoted to the post of Sub -Divisional Engineer (Electrical) for want of roster point.;