justices M Sathyanarayanan and R Hemalatha issued the notices on a plea filed by P Venkatesan, a retired differently-abled assistant professor from Bharathiar University.
ADVERTISEMENT
SUBSCRIBE E-PAPER
STOCK MARKET BSE NSE
Home States Tamil Nadu
Madras HC asks why reservation for differently-abled not filled in TN universities, colleges
The two-member bench of justices M Sathyanarayanan and R Hemalatha issued the notices on a plea filed by P Venkatesan, a retired differently-abled assistant professor from Bharathiar University
Published: 08th October 2020 07:41 PM | Last Updated: 08th October 2020 07:41 PM | A+A A-
Madras High Court Madras High Court (File photo | EPS)By Harish MuraliExpress News Service
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Thursday ordered the commissionerate for the welfare of the differently-abled to respond to a plea seeking directions on the proper implementation of 3% reservation for them in all teaching and non-teaching posts in state universities and colleges.
The two-member bench of justices M Sathyanarayanan and R Hemalatha issued the notices on a plea filed by P Venkatesan, a retired differently-abled assistant professor from Bharathiar University.
According to the petitioner, none of the universities in the state are complying with Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights & Full Participation) Act 1995.
He added that information sought under the Right to Information Act revealed that the universities are not filling up backlogged seats for differently-abled persons and 75% seats were vacant for research
scholars and teaching posts.
ADVERTISEMENT
The petitioner also said the state government should identify appropriate employment opportunities in all grades for persons who have blindness or low vision, hearing impairment, locomotor disability or cerebral palsy and other disabilities.
However, rights and opportunities are intentionally being denied in the recruitment process conducted by all the state government departments, government-aided institutions and universities due to the ignorance of the differently-abled, he stated.
The bench recording the submissions directed the counsel for the petitioner to implead the universities that failed to comply with the order.
Issuing a notice to the state and the department for the welfare of the differently-abled, the bench then adjourned the plea to November 27.
