V. SURENDRA MOHAN versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

V. SURENDRA MOHAN versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

The TNPSC notification limited eligibility for the identified posts to partially blind/partially deaf persons with 40%-50% disability as authorized by the State Government after consultation with the High Court; the appellant's disability certificate showing 70% rendered him ineligible under that valid and...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: V. SURENDRA MOHAN; Respondent: State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal No. 83 of 2019 / Judgment on Appeal by the Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Reservation, Eligibility Criteria, Recruitment, Judicial Service, Statutory Interpretation
Disability Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Service Law Reservation Eligibility Criteria Recruitment Judicial Service +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

V. SURENDRA MOHAN

Appellant

State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal No. 83 of 2019 / Judgment on Appeal by the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant suffering with 70% visual disability was eligible to participate in the selection as per TNPSC notification dated 26.08.2014?
  2. 2 Whether the condition of 40%-50% disability for partially blind and partially deaf categories is a valid condition?
  3. 3 Whether the State Government decision dated 08.08.2014 limiting eligibility to 40%-50% for partially blind and partially deaf breaches the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995?

Ratio Decidendi

The TNPSC notification limited eligibility for the identified posts to partially blind/partially deaf persons with 40%-50% disability as authorized by the State Government after consultation with the High Court; the appellant's disability certificate showing 70% rendered him ineligible under that valid and reasonable criterion, and the reservation requirement of Section 33 was fulfilled; accordingly the restriction was lawful and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed