IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WA.No. 138 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.17841/2008 Dated 29/10/2008 .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- KIRAN.V.C., 31 YEARS, S/O.VISWANATHAN.N., AARANI, T.C.20/1971, SASTRI NAGAR SOUTH, S-46, KARAMANA PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI. 2. HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD., ENGINE DIVISION, BANGALORE-560093., REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN ADV. SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR FOR R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JJ ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.138 of 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of December,2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph.J Petitioner is the appellant. He approached this court praying for a direction to the second respondent to appoint the petitioner to the post of Engineer Grade-II and also with a prayer to pay compensation. The learned single judge dismissed the writ petition directing the second respondent to consider the appointment sympathetically under the Visually Handicapped Quota. Though the petitioner has a case that as of now he is not Visually Handicapped, records apparently shows that he was visually handicapped and it was against that quota petitioner was proposed to be appointed, subject to the further condition that he possess the required qualification. Petitioner apprehends that if he is appointed under the visually handicapped quota, he will not be considered for further promotion. The learned counsel for respondent submits that for the purpose of promotion he will be treated as regular recruitee and therefore there is no basis for the apprehension of the petitioner. In the above circumstances the writ appeal is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment in the next available or arising vacancy in the W.A.No.138 of 2009 2 visually handicapped quota. In view of the certificates produced we make it clear that there is no need of further certificates in that regard. However, the petitioner should satisfy the second respondent that he possesses all other qualification required for the post offered to him. It is made clear that for the purpose of further promotion he shall be entitled to all the benefits of a regular recruitee, in case he is appointed as above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JUDGE ssn