vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.687 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.687 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.687 OF 2008 Yadav Sangram Sonkamble ... Petitioner V/s. The Divisional Manger Western Railway office, Mumbai & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.Y.S. Sonkamble, Petitioner present in person Mr.Suresh Kumar for Respondents CORAM: J.N. PATEL & J.N. PATEL & J.N. PATEL & SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. DATED: FEBRUARY 1, 2008 FEBRUARY 1, 2008 FEBRUARY 1, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Not on Board. Mentioned. 2. By this petition, the petitioner, assisted by a friend, has approached this Court invoking its extra-ordinary jurisdiction seeking directions against the respondents to allow the petitioner to appear for the examination for group D to be held on 3.2.2008 by providing a scribe/writer to be engaged by the petitioner. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has passed SSC examination from SSC Board, Aurangabad in the year 1989-1990. In response to the advertisement issued by Respondent No.2, he has applied for the post of Group D in the category of physically challenged persons. The : 2 : petitioner falls in the visually challenged category and, therefore, he seeks directions of this Court that he may be permitted to take assistance of one Kalpana Chandu Ghate who has passed 9th standard as scribe/writer for the said examination. In addition to seeking such permission, the petitioner has also challenged the rules which prohibit such persons from taking assistance from better qualified persons to act as a scribe/writer for the written examination. In addition to this, the petitioner also states that visually challenged candidates should be exempted from written examination particularly in category D as that is not material for assessing the eligibility of the candidate considering the nature of the job for which he has applied. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the railways was kind enough to take notice and seek instructions in the matter. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the railways that the petitioner ought to have informed the railways for providing him a scribe/writer so that they could have made arrangements. It is brought to our notice that in all 518 candidates from visually handicapped category are going to appear in group D category out of which 55 of them have applied for assistance from the railways to provide scribes/writers. It is submitted that it will not be possible to get a scribe/writer within such a short time : 3 : to assist the petitioner though the respondents may make necessary efforts. 5. It is submitted that insofar as the prayer of the petitioner to relax the condition of percentage of scribe/writer is concerned, it cannot be considered for the reason that the other candidates opting for the said category will be at a disadvantage and secondly that written examination is a part of the selection process which cannot be dispensed with and all candidates from visually challenged category are appearing for the said written examination and therefore the petitioner’s request cannot be considered for direct interview for the purpose of selection. 6. In our view, though the petitioner’s case requires to be dealt with sympathetically, it will not be possible for this court to grant prayer clauses (a) and (c) as it is in accordance with the rules prescribed for the recruitment and selection of the group D candidate from the category of visually challenged. We, therefore, dispose of this petition with a direction to the respondents in terms of prayer clause (b). 7. In case the respondent is not in a position to provide a scribe, then the petitioner may choose another scribe/writer which will meet the requirements of the : 4 : selection board and such scribe/writer may be permitted to assist the petitioner in the written examination, even if he has passed the seventh standard with more than 60% marks. The learned counsel assures to communicate this order to the selection committee so that the petitioner can appear for the written examination which is going to be held on 3.2.2008. 8. The Petition stands disposed of accordingly. 9. Authenticated copy of the order be provided to the parties to enable the parties to act upon it. (J.N. PATEL, J.) (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.)