Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Kerala High Court, on January 8, 2025, issued a bailable warrant against Dr. Rajan N. Khobragade (respondent), the Additional Chief Secretary of the Health and Family Welfare Department, after the official failed to comply with the Court's directives regarding the promotion of a government employee with a 40% locomotor disability.

The warrant was issued by a Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhammed Mustaque and Justice C. Jayachandran, observing that the court had directed the respondent to appear personally, if compliance was not ensured, but he failed to do so. “Under these circumstances, we find no reason to accede to the request of the learned Additional Advocate General. Accordingly, we issue a bailable warrant against the additionally impleaded respondent,” the court stated.

The issue began when Dr. Unnikrishnan, a disabled government official working within the Health Department, filed a petition challenging the State’s failure to consider disabled persons for lateral reservation in promotions. The petitioner had requested that the government extend such reservation for the post of Deputy Director of Health Services, contending that the lack of such an initiative violated the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

In 2023, the court directed the State's Health Department to convene a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) to evaluate the petitioner’s promotion eligibility. Despite subsequent orders and explicit warnings, the directive remained unimplemented. On December 10, 2024, the court impleaded the respondent in the contempt proceedings and instructed him to ensure compliance or appear in person.

In its previous order, the court emphasised that when the method of appointment to a post is exclusively through promotion, there is no justification for denying lateral reservation for disabled candidates, except on the grounds of their non-suitability to hold the post.The Court further noted that the State authorities' stance, as outlined in Clause 8(ii) of a government order, was perverse and misaligned with Supreme Court precedents in cases like Leesamma v. State of Kerala (2021) and A.K. Nair v. State of Kerala (2023). It held that disabled individuals deemed eligible for the feeder category should not face additional barriers for promotion. The court noted that the respondents had conceded in their rejection order that disabled persons, including the petitioner, were eligible to hold the post in question. Consequently, the respondents’ argument before the Tribunal was described as “palpably perverse and manifestly unreasonable.”

During the proceedings on January 8, 2025, the Additional Advocate General sought a two-week extension to report compliance. However, the court rejected the request, noting the repeated non-compliance despite several opportunities. The court reaffirmed that there was no justification for further delay, given the directives issued previously.

The court adjourned the matter for further hearing on January 20, 2025.

 

Cause Title: Dr B. Unnikrishnan v Mohammed Hanish and Another [Cont. Case (C). No.2718/2023]

Appearance: Dr. Unnikrishnan was represented by Advocates P. Nandakumar, Amrutha Sanjeev, Vivek Vijayakumar, and Indu C. Sreekumar, while the Additional Advocate General appeared for the respondents.