Civil services exam: restriction on disabled OBC aspirants ‘arbitrary'

Bench allows aspirant's appeal against CAT order The Madras High Court has held that the maximum number of attempts (seven) fixed for physically challenged persons in the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category in the civil services examination is arbitrary as disabled in the general category are also allowed seven attempts while there is no restriction for the disabled belonging to Scheduled Castes and Tribes. A Division Bench of Justices Elipe Dharma Rao and N. Kirubakaran was allowing a writ petition by M. Selvakumar, who appealed against an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). The petitioner, an orthopaedic-disabled person, made an attempt for the eighth time in the examination conducted during 2007 and for the ninth time the next year. As his name did not appear in the list of candidates who had cleared the preliminary examination, he made an application under the RTI Act to find out why he was not considered. He was informed that he had already exhausted seven attempts and was, therefore, not considered. He filed an application before the CAT, Chennai, challenging the notification of December 2007 issued in respect of civil services examination, 2008. Since there was a delay in filing the application, he filed a petition seeking to condone the delay. The tribunal while dismissing the condonation petition also dismissed the application without going into its merits. Aggrieved, Mr. Selvakumar filed the present writ petition. The Bench said when the number of attempts had been increased from four to seven in respect of physically challenged candidates in the General Category and when there was no restriction with regard to the number of attempts for physically challenged persons in SC/ST category, restricting the number of attempts to seven in respect of such candidates in the OBC community was a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. The non-increase in the number of attempts in respect of physically challenged candidates belonging to OBC proportionately to the number in the general category was arbitrary and prejudicial to the interests of physically challenged persons belonging to OBC. Mr. Justices Elipe Dharma Rao and Kirubakaran said the petitioner was entitled to get relaxation as had been granted to the disabled belonging to the General Category.