Case Title: State of Kerala and others v. Leesamma Joseph
The Supreme Court ruled that people with physical disabilities had the right to preferential treatment in promotions as well. A two-judge bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R Subhash Reddy gave this verdict, dismissing an appeal filed by the State of Kerala against a Kerala High Court judgement in the present case.
The Supreme Court ruled that the High Court's decision was "salutary" and did not warrant intervention. Furthermore, the Supreme Court ordered the Kerala government to establish disability promotion reservations within three months.
The bench's decision followed a January 2020 decision by a three-judge bench in the case of Siddaraju v. State of Karnataka, which concluded that the norm of no reservation in promotions established in the Indra Sawhney case does not apply to Persons with Disabilities (PwD). In Siddaraju, a bench of Justices RF Nariman, V Ramasubramanian, and Aniruddha Bose was deliberating on a reference that placed in doubt a decision made in Rajiv Kumar Gupta & Others v. Union of India & Others. The bench in Rajiv Gupta stated that there is no limitation against reservation in promotion for persons with disabilities under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights, and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The bench in Rajiv Gupta stated that the concept established in Indra Sawhney judgement against reservation in promotions does not apply to PwDs.
In Siddaraju, a three-judge court maintained the ruling in Rajiv Gupta that people with disabilities have the right to advance in the quota system. The Supreme Court remarked in this decision that the Kerala Government has not followed the guidelines in Rajiv Gupta. As a result, the state was directed to implement the instructions in all positions within three months.
The 1995 Act recognises the right to promotion. Section 32 of the 1995 Act requires the identification of posts for reservation as a prerequisite for appointment; nevertheless, an appointment cannot be thwarted by refusing to identify posts.
The absence of a provision for reservation in the recruitment regulations will not invalidate a PwD's entitlement, as such right is derived from legislation. A PwD can be issued a promotion reservation even if they were not originally recruited under the PwD quota. The State of Kerala argued in its Supreme Court appeal that the applicant cannot be accorded reservation in promotion because she was nominated on compassionate grounds rather than under the PwD quota. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, stating that accepting it would be discriminatory and offend the Constitution's mandate.