Re: [AI] CHENNAI: Partial blindness shatters man’s judge dreams

2015-06-08 Thread Mohib Anwar Rafay
Hey Arjun my contact detail is in the signature. By the way my mobile
number is 955765

On 6/8/15, Arjun Malhotra malhotraarjun2...@gmail.com wrote:
 Need of hour is a PIL in SC for such arbitrary rules which lacks
 judicial use of disgression.

 On 6/8/15, Arjun Malhotra malhotraarjun2...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi Mohib
 Can I have your contact details Please?

 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Yes one thing is clear, if supreme court holds that any of such moves
 which is based on arbitrary decision of the government, is infringing
 the right of visually impaired person, even high court can not
 exercise its discretionary administrative power while giving  its
 ascent on such appointments. Cirtain states are open for the
 appointments of visually impaired candidates as judges in lower
 judiciary, such as Delhi and Haryana. Presently there are not less
 than 5 judges who have been appointed in Haryana and Delhi judiciary
 under visually impaired quota.

 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Actually in the matter of appointment of judges to lower judiciary,
 the things very much depends upon the high court of concern state
 itself. As it is the requirement under the constitution that while
 appointment to such judiciary the consultation from high court is
 necessary. Mean the high court in this respect is performing the
 administrative as wel judicial function. If you are aggrieved with the
 decision of the government for not providing the seat in lower
 judiciary, you will be before the same high court who didn't give its
 ascent for such appointment. So the matter is not that much easy.
 While conducting a hearing in my matter, on the plea of state counsel
 that such reservation can only be given after proper approval of high
 court itself, Allahabad high court observed that you (government)
 didn't come before us for any kind of such consultation.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This is an opportune time all blind lawyers practicing in several High
 Courts as well in the Supreme Court should write an open letter to the
 CJI and CC it to the PMO of India, And publicise this in the media.
 I'm sure things are gonna get better. One could also take on board the
 blind judge in one of districts in MP as reported in the news an year
 ago. I wish interested candidates don't miss this opportunity.




 On 6/8/15, umesh kasab umeshkasa...@gmail.com wrote:
 Supposedly most progressive organ of government falls prey to the
 simplest and straightest dictum-Its easy to preach than practice!
 What
 are the requirements of the job, by the way,  that disables the
 candidate from performing the duties in a proper way? Has this part
 got any mentioning in the verdict?

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what it all indicate: high-profile lawyers in the disability
 sector
 are at unease while taking on Courts for not complying to the law. A
 month ago, I read an article in the Bangalore Mirror that why Court
 premises and functioning are inaccessible to the blind and nobody
 raises questions. Perhaps our sector has sole hope from the
 judiciary
 to arrest our woes,hence nobody takes on the guardian of the
 Constitution. So lawyers are in a dilemma perhaps.


 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 High court may be right in its observation while dismissing the
 petition that the candidate didn't challenge the impugned circular
 of
 the government and participated in the recruitment process .
 However
 solely on this ground the relief to the petitioner can not be
 denyed
 anyways. Cirtainly the judgment is against the spirit of the
 principle
 of equality. Such judgment must be challenged in the supreme court.
 There are cirtain other states who don't allow visually impaired
 candidates even to appear in the recruitment process, such as Uttar
 Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. However on my writ petition (Mohib
 Anwar
 versus UP public service commission and state of Uttar Pradesh),
 they
 allow me to appear in the examination along with the facility of
 the
 scribe, but they were not agree on the point of reservation to
 visually impaired aspirents in judiciary.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This order is utterly disgusting: I contend even hundred per cent
 blind is fit for a Civil Court judge
 If this man approaches the Supreme Court and shows them evidences
 from
 US, South Africa and UK where blind judges hold reputed posts in
 Courts; I could hope that the highest Court of the land will
 pronounce
 judgment in his favour. Our judiciary should shed its
 contradictory
 approach while ensuring employment to persons with blindness. If a
 blind could become a parliamentarian and  join Indian executive
 then
 there is no doubt he/she is equally competent  to discharge
 his/her
 duty as a Civil Court Judge. India's former CCPD was a blind judge
 and
 exercised all rights as a Civil 

Re: [AI] CHENNAI: Partial blindness shatters man’s judge dreams

2015-06-08 Thread avinash shahi
So what it all indicate: high-profile lawyers in the disability sector
are at unease while taking on Courts for not complying to the law. A
month ago, I read an article in the Bangalore Mirror that why Court
premises and functioning are inaccessible to the blind and nobody
raises questions. Perhaps our sector has sole hope from the judiciary
to arrest our woes,hence nobody takes on the guardian of the
Constitution. So lawyers are in a dilemma perhaps.


On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 High court may be right in its observation while dismissing the
 petition that the candidate didn't challenge the impugned circular of
 the government and participated in the recruitment process . However
 solely on this ground the relief to the petitioner can not be denyed
 anyways. Cirtainly the judgment is against the spirit of the principle
 of equality. Such judgment must be challenged in the supreme court.
 There are cirtain other states who don't allow visually impaired
 candidates even to appear in the recruitment process, such as Uttar
 Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. However on my writ petition (Mohib Anwar
 versus UP public service commission and state of Uttar Pradesh), they
 allow me to appear in the examination along with the facility of the
 scribe, but they were not agree on the point of reservation to
 visually impaired aspirents in judiciary.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This order is utterly disgusting: I contend even hundred per cent
 blind is fit for a Civil Court judge
 If this man approaches the Supreme Court and shows them evidences from
 US, South Africa and UK where blind judges hold reputed posts in
 Courts; I could hope that the highest Court of the land will pronounce
 judgment in his favour. Our judiciary should shed its contradictory
 approach while ensuring employment to persons with blindness. If a
 blind could become a parliamentarian and  join Indian executive then
 there is no doubt he/she is equally competent  to discharge his/her
 duty as a Civil Court Judge. India's former CCPD was a blind judge and
 exercised all rights as a Civil Court Judge.
 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Partial-blindness-shatters-mans-judge-dreams/articleshow/47578609.cms


 A person suffering from 70% blindness has failed to secure the post of
 a civil judge despite clearing the written examination and viva voce,
 as the Madras high court ruled that visual disability of more than the
 maximum permissible limit of 50% cannot be allowed for civil judges.

  Dismissing the writ petition of the aspirant V Surendra Mohan,
 Justice V Ramasubramanian said, Taking into account the nature of
 duties to be performed by the civil judge, the government, in
 consultation with the high court, had proposed to restrict the
 applicability of the benefit of reservation only to those whose
 disability ranges from 40-50%. If a person has not less than 40%
 blindness, he becomes eligible for the benefit of reservation. This
 fundamental and essential feature of the reservation is not taken away
 by the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment, while not depriving
 the benefit of reservation to those who come within the definition of
 the expression 'person with disability', restricts it to those whose
 percentage of disability, is 50% less. This cannot be termed as
 nullifying the effect of the statute.

  Surendra Mohan, a partially blind person with the percentage of
 disability at 70%, applied for civil judge post, and passed the
 written examination. Since he was not included in the list of
 candidates short-listed for viva voce, he filed the present writ
 petition for inclusion in the interview list.

  The court first allowed him to participate in the interview and said
 the result would be kept in a sealed envelope. But later it passed
 orders in favour of declaring the result, in purview of a different
 case. Surendra Mohan secured 178 marks out of 400 in written
 examination, and 38.25 marks out of 60 in viva voce, it was revealed.

  A difficulty arose because a government order dated August 8, 2014,
 had made it clear that the benefit of reservation for the physically
 challenged is available only to those blind and deaf candidates whose
 percentage of disability is 40-50%.

  S Vijay Narayan, senior counsel for Surendra Mohan, then assailed the
 provision saying it sought to dilute the benefits available to
 disabled people. Rejecting the submissions, Justice Ramasubramanian
 further said it was too late to challenge the selection, because, a
 person, who participates in a process of selection, cannot later turn
 around and question the prescription contained in the very
 notification for recruitment.


 --
 Avinash Shahi
 Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU



 Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility
 of
 mobile phones / Tabs on:
 

Re: [AI] CHENNAI: Partial blindness shatters man’s judge dreams

2015-06-08 Thread umesh kasab
Supposedly most progressive organ of government falls prey to the
simplest and straightest dictum-Its easy to preach than practice! What
are the requirements of the job, by the way,  that disables the
candidate from performing the duties in a proper way? Has this part
got any mentioning in the verdict?

On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what it all indicate: high-profile lawyers in the disability sector
 are at unease while taking on Courts for not complying to the law. A
 month ago, I read an article in the Bangalore Mirror that why Court
 premises and functioning are inaccessible to the blind and nobody
 raises questions. Perhaps our sector has sole hope from the judiciary
 to arrest our woes,hence nobody takes on the guardian of the
 Constitution. So lawyers are in a dilemma perhaps.


 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 High court may be right in its observation while dismissing the
 petition that the candidate didn't challenge the impugned circular of
 the government and participated in the recruitment process . However
 solely on this ground the relief to the petitioner can not be denyed
 anyways. Cirtainly the judgment is against the spirit of the principle
 of equality. Such judgment must be challenged in the supreme court.
 There are cirtain other states who don't allow visually impaired
 candidates even to appear in the recruitment process, such as Uttar
 Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. However on my writ petition (Mohib Anwar
 versus UP public service commission and state of Uttar Pradesh), they
 allow me to appear in the examination along with the facility of the
 scribe, but they were not agree on the point of reservation to
 visually impaired aspirents in judiciary.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This order is utterly disgusting: I contend even hundred per cent
 blind is fit for a Civil Court judge
 If this man approaches the Supreme Court and shows them evidences from
 US, South Africa and UK where blind judges hold reputed posts in
 Courts; I could hope that the highest Court of the land will pronounce
 judgment in his favour. Our judiciary should shed its contradictory
 approach while ensuring employment to persons with blindness. If a
 blind could become a parliamentarian and  join Indian executive then
 there is no doubt he/she is equally competent  to discharge his/her
 duty as a Civil Court Judge. India's former CCPD was a blind judge and
 exercised all rights as a Civil Court Judge.
 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Partial-blindness-shatters-mans-judge-dreams/articleshow/47578609.cms


 A person suffering from 70% blindness has failed to secure the post of
 a civil judge despite clearing the written examination and viva voce,
 as the Madras high court ruled that visual disability of more than the
 maximum permissible limit of 50% cannot be allowed for civil judges.

  Dismissing the writ petition of the aspirant V Surendra Mohan,
 Justice V Ramasubramanian said, Taking into account the nature of
 duties to be performed by the civil judge, the government, in
 consultation with the high court, had proposed to restrict the
 applicability of the benefit of reservation only to those whose
 disability ranges from 40-50%. If a person has not less than 40%
 blindness, he becomes eligible for the benefit of reservation. This
 fundamental and essential feature of the reservation is not taken away
 by the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment, while not depriving
 the benefit of reservation to those who come within the definition of
 the expression 'person with disability', restricts it to those whose
 percentage of disability, is 50% less. This cannot be termed as
 nullifying the effect of the statute.

  Surendra Mohan, a partially blind person with the percentage of
 disability at 70%, applied for civil judge post, and passed the
 written examination. Since he was not included in the list of
 candidates short-listed for viva voce, he filed the present writ
 petition for inclusion in the interview list.

  The court first allowed him to participate in the interview and said
 the result would be kept in a sealed envelope. But later it passed
 orders in favour of declaring the result, in purview of a different
 case. Surendra Mohan secured 178 marks out of 400 in written
 examination, and 38.25 marks out of 60 in viva voce, it was revealed.

  A difficulty arose because a government order dated August 8, 2014,
 had made it clear that the benefit of reservation for the physically
 challenged is available only to those blind and deaf candidates whose
 percentage of disability is 40-50%.

  S Vijay Narayan, senior counsel for Surendra Mohan, then assailed the
 provision saying it sought to dilute the benefits available to
 disabled people. Rejecting the submissions, Justice Ramasubramanian
 further said it was too late to challenge the selection, because, a
 person, who participates in a process of 

Re: [AI] CHENNAI: Partial blindness shatters man’s judge dreams

2015-06-08 Thread Mohib Anwar Rafay
High court may be right in its observation while dismissing the
petition that the candidate didn't challenge the impugned circular of
the government and participated in the recruitment process . However
solely on this ground the relief to the petitioner can not be denyed
anyways. Cirtainly the judgment is against the spirit of the principle
of equality. Such judgment must be challenged in the supreme court.
There are cirtain other states who don't allow visually impaired
candidates even to appear in the recruitment process, such as Uttar
Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. However on my writ petition (Mohib Anwar
versus UP public service commission and state of Uttar Pradesh), they
allow me to appear in the examination along with the facility of the
scribe, but they were not agree on the point of reservation to
visually impaired aspirents in judiciary.

On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This order is utterly disgusting: I contend even hundred per cent
 blind is fit for a Civil Court judge
 If this man approaches the Supreme Court and shows them evidences from
 US, South Africa and UK where blind judges hold reputed posts in
 Courts; I could hope that the highest Court of the land will pronounce
 judgment in his favour. Our judiciary should shed its contradictory
 approach while ensuring employment to persons with blindness. If a
 blind could become a parliamentarian and  join Indian executive then
 there is no doubt he/she is equally competent  to discharge his/her
 duty as a Civil Court Judge. India's former CCPD was a blind judge and
 exercised all rights as a Civil Court Judge.
 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Partial-blindness-shatters-mans-judge-dreams/articleshow/47578609.cms


 A person suffering from 70% blindness has failed to secure the post of
 a civil judge despite clearing the written examination and viva voce,
 as the Madras high court ruled that visual disability of more than the
 maximum permissible limit of 50% cannot be allowed for civil judges.

  Dismissing the writ petition of the aspirant V Surendra Mohan,
 Justice V Ramasubramanian said, Taking into account the nature of
 duties to be performed by the civil judge, the government, in
 consultation with the high court, had proposed to restrict the
 applicability of the benefit of reservation only to those whose
 disability ranges from 40-50%. If a person has not less than 40%
 blindness, he becomes eligible for the benefit of reservation. This
 fundamental and essential feature of the reservation is not taken away
 by the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment, while not depriving
 the benefit of reservation to those who come within the definition of
 the expression 'person with disability', restricts it to those whose
 percentage of disability, is 50% less. This cannot be termed as
 nullifying the effect of the statute.

  Surendra Mohan, a partially blind person with the percentage of
 disability at 70%, applied for civil judge post, and passed the
 written examination. Since he was not included in the list of
 candidates short-listed for viva voce, he filed the present writ
 petition for inclusion in the interview list.

  The court first allowed him to participate in the interview and said
 the result would be kept in a sealed envelope. But later it passed
 orders in favour of declaring the result, in purview of a different
 case. Surendra Mohan secured 178 marks out of 400 in written
 examination, and 38.25 marks out of 60 in viva voce, it was revealed.

  A difficulty arose because a government order dated August 8, 2014,
 had made it clear that the benefit of reservation for the physically
 challenged is available only to those blind and deaf candidates whose
 percentage of disability is 40-50%.

  S Vijay Narayan, senior counsel for Surendra Mohan, then assailed the
 provision saying it sought to dilute the benefits available to
 disabled people. Rejecting the submissions, Justice Ramasubramanian
 further said it was too late to challenge the selection, because, a
 person, who participates in a process of selection, cannot later turn
 around and question the prescription contained in the very
 notification for recruitment.


 --
 Avinash Shahi
 Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU



 Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of
 mobile phones / Tabs on:
 http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in


 Search for old postings at:
 http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/

 To unsubscribe send a message to
 accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in
 with the subject unsubscribe.

 To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please
 visit the list home page at
 http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in


 Disclaimer:
 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the
 person sending the mail and AI in no way 

Re: [AI] CHENNAI: Partial blindness shatters man’s judge dreams

2015-06-08 Thread avinash shahi
This is an opportune time all blind lawyers practicing in several High
Courts as well in the Supreme Court should write an open letter to the
CJI and CC it to the PMO of India, And publicise this in the media.
I'm sure things are gonna get better. One could also take on board the
blind judge in one of districts in MP as reported in the news an year
ago. I wish interested candidates don't miss this opportunity.




On 6/8/15, umesh kasab umeshkasa...@gmail.com wrote:
 Supposedly most progressive organ of government falls prey to the
 simplest and straightest dictum-Its easy to preach than practice! What
 are the requirements of the job, by the way,  that disables the
 candidate from performing the duties in a proper way? Has this part
 got any mentioning in the verdict?

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what it all indicate: high-profile lawyers in the disability sector
 are at unease while taking on Courts for not complying to the law. A
 month ago, I read an article in the Bangalore Mirror that why Court
 premises and functioning are inaccessible to the blind and nobody
 raises questions. Perhaps our sector has sole hope from the judiciary
 to arrest our woes,hence nobody takes on the guardian of the
 Constitution. So lawyers are in a dilemma perhaps.


 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 High court may be right in its observation while dismissing the
 petition that the candidate didn't challenge the impugned circular of
 the government and participated in the recruitment process . However
 solely on this ground the relief to the petitioner can not be denyed
 anyways. Cirtainly the judgment is against the spirit of the principle
 of equality. Such judgment must be challenged in the supreme court.
 There are cirtain other states who don't allow visually impaired
 candidates even to appear in the recruitment process, such as Uttar
 Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. However on my writ petition (Mohib Anwar
 versus UP public service commission and state of Uttar Pradesh), they
 allow me to appear in the examination along with the facility of the
 scribe, but they were not agree on the point of reservation to
 visually impaired aspirents in judiciary.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This order is utterly disgusting: I contend even hundred per cent
 blind is fit for a Civil Court judge
 If this man approaches the Supreme Court and shows them evidences from
 US, South Africa and UK where blind judges hold reputed posts in
 Courts; I could hope that the highest Court of the land will pronounce
 judgment in his favour. Our judiciary should shed its contradictory
 approach while ensuring employment to persons with blindness. If a
 blind could become a parliamentarian and  join Indian executive then
 there is no doubt he/she is equally competent  to discharge his/her
 duty as a Civil Court Judge. India's former CCPD was a blind judge and
 exercised all rights as a Civil Court Judge.
 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Partial-blindness-shatters-mans-judge-dreams/articleshow/47578609.cms


 A person suffering from 70% blindness has failed to secure the post of
 a civil judge despite clearing the written examination and viva voce,
 as the Madras high court ruled that visual disability of more than the
 maximum permissible limit of 50% cannot be allowed for civil judges.

  Dismissing the writ petition of the aspirant V Surendra Mohan,
 Justice V Ramasubramanian said, Taking into account the nature of
 duties to be performed by the civil judge, the government, in
 consultation with the high court, had proposed to restrict the
 applicability of the benefit of reservation only to those whose
 disability ranges from 40-50%. If a person has not less than 40%
 blindness, he becomes eligible for the benefit of reservation. This
 fundamental and essential feature of the reservation is not taken away
 by the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment, while not depriving
 the benefit of reservation to those who come within the definition of
 the expression 'person with disability', restricts it to those whose
 percentage of disability, is 50% less. This cannot be termed as
 nullifying the effect of the statute.

  Surendra Mohan, a partially blind person with the percentage of
 disability at 70%, applied for civil judge post, and passed the
 written examination. Since he was not included in the list of
 candidates short-listed for viva voce, he filed the present writ
 petition for inclusion in the interview list.

  The court first allowed him to participate in the interview and said
 the result would be kept in a sealed envelope. But later it passed
 orders in favour of declaring the result, in purview of a different
 case. Surendra Mohan secured 178 marks out of 400 in written
 examination, and 38.25 marks out of 60 in viva voce, it was revealed.

  A difficulty arose because a government order dated August 8, 2014,
 had made it clear 

Re: [AI] CHENNAI: Partial blindness shatters man’s judge dreams

2015-06-08 Thread Arjun Malhotra
Need of hour is a PIL in SC for such arbitrary rules which lacks
judicial use of disgression.

On 6/8/15, Arjun Malhotra malhotraarjun2...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi Mohib
 Can I have your contact details Please?

 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Yes one thing is clear, if supreme court holds that any of such moves
 which is based on arbitrary decision of the government, is infringing
 the right of visually impaired person, even high court can not
 exercise its discretionary administrative power while giving  its
 ascent on such appointments. Cirtain states are open for the
 appointments of visually impaired candidates as judges in lower
 judiciary, such as Delhi and Haryana. Presently there are not less
 than 5 judges who have been appointed in Haryana and Delhi judiciary
 under visually impaired quota.

 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Actually in the matter of appointment of judges to lower judiciary,
 the things very much depends upon the high court of concern state
 itself. As it is the requirement under the constitution that while
 appointment to such judiciary the consultation from high court is
 necessary. Mean the high court in this respect is performing the
 administrative as wel judicial function. If you are aggrieved with the
 decision of the government for not providing the seat in lower
 judiciary, you will be before the same high court who didn't give its
 ascent for such appointment. So the matter is not that much easy.
 While conducting a hearing in my matter, on the plea of state counsel
 that such reservation can only be given after proper approval of high
 court itself, Allahabad high court observed that you (government)
 didn't come before us for any kind of such consultation.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This is an opportune time all blind lawyers practicing in several High
 Courts as well in the Supreme Court should write an open letter to the
 CJI and CC it to the PMO of India, And publicise this in the media.
 I'm sure things are gonna get better. One could also take on board the
 blind judge in one of districts in MP as reported in the news an year
 ago. I wish interested candidates don't miss this opportunity.




 On 6/8/15, umesh kasab umeshkasa...@gmail.com wrote:
 Supposedly most progressive organ of government falls prey to the
 simplest and straightest dictum-Its easy to preach than practice! What
 are the requirements of the job, by the way,  that disables the
 candidate from performing the duties in a proper way? Has this part
 got any mentioning in the verdict?

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what it all indicate: high-profile lawyers in the disability
 sector
 are at unease while taking on Courts for not complying to the law. A
 month ago, I read an article in the Bangalore Mirror that why Court
 premises and functioning are inaccessible to the blind and nobody
 raises questions. Perhaps our sector has sole hope from the judiciary
 to arrest our woes,hence nobody takes on the guardian of the
 Constitution. So lawyers are in a dilemma perhaps.


 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 High court may be right in its observation while dismissing the
 petition that the candidate didn't challenge the impugned circular
 of
 the government and participated in the recruitment process . However
 solely on this ground the relief to the petitioner can not be denyed
 anyways. Cirtainly the judgment is against the spirit of the
 principle
 of equality. Such judgment must be challenged in the supreme court.
 There are cirtain other states who don't allow visually impaired
 candidates even to appear in the recruitment process, such as Uttar
 Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. However on my writ petition (Mohib Anwar
 versus UP public service commission and state of Uttar Pradesh),
 they
 allow me to appear in the examination along with the facility of the
 scribe, but they were not agree on the point of reservation to
 visually impaired aspirents in judiciary.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This order is utterly disgusting: I contend even hundred per cent
 blind is fit for a Civil Court judge
 If this man approaches the Supreme Court and shows them evidences
 from
 US, South Africa and UK where blind judges hold reputed posts in
 Courts; I could hope that the highest Court of the land will
 pronounce
 judgment in his favour. Our judiciary should shed its contradictory
 approach while ensuring employment to persons with blindness. If a
 blind could become a parliamentarian and  join Indian executive
 then
 there is no doubt he/she is equally competent  to discharge his/her
 duty as a Civil Court Judge. India's former CCPD was a blind judge
 and
 exercised all rights as a Civil Court Judge.
 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Partial-blindness-shatters-mans-judge-dreams/articleshow/47578609.cms


 A person suffering from 70% 

Re: [AI] CHENNAI: Partial blindness shatters man’s judge dreams

2015-06-08 Thread Mohib Anwar Rafay
Actually in the matter of appointment of judges to lower judiciary,
the things very much depends upon the high court of concern state
itself. As it is the requirement under the constitution that while
appointment to such judiciary the consultation from high court is
necessary. Mean the high court in this respect is performing the
administrative as wel judicial function. If you are aggrieved with the
decision of the government for not providing the seat in lower
judiciary, you will be before the same high court who didn't give its
ascent for such appointment. So the matter is not that much easy.
While conducting a hearing in my matter, on the plea of state counsel
that such reservation can only be given after proper approval of high
court itself, Allahabad high court observed that you (government)
didn't come before us for any kind of such consultation.

On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This is an opportune time all blind lawyers practicing in several High
 Courts as well in the Supreme Court should write an open letter to the
 CJI and CC it to the PMO of India, And publicise this in the media.
 I'm sure things are gonna get better. One could also take on board the
 blind judge in one of districts in MP as reported in the news an year
 ago. I wish interested candidates don't miss this opportunity.




 On 6/8/15, umesh kasab umeshkasa...@gmail.com wrote:
 Supposedly most progressive organ of government falls prey to the
 simplest and straightest dictum-Its easy to preach than practice! What
 are the requirements of the job, by the way,  that disables the
 candidate from performing the duties in a proper way? Has this part
 got any mentioning in the verdict?

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what it all indicate: high-profile lawyers in the disability sector
 are at unease while taking on Courts for not complying to the law. A
 month ago, I read an article in the Bangalore Mirror that why Court
 premises and functioning are inaccessible to the blind and nobody
 raises questions. Perhaps our sector has sole hope from the judiciary
 to arrest our woes,hence nobody takes on the guardian of the
 Constitution. So lawyers are in a dilemma perhaps.


 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 High court may be right in its observation while dismissing the
 petition that the candidate didn't challenge the impugned circular of
 the government and participated in the recruitment process . However
 solely on this ground the relief to the petitioner can not be denyed
 anyways. Cirtainly the judgment is against the spirit of the principle
 of equality. Such judgment must be challenged in the supreme court.
 There are cirtain other states who don't allow visually impaired
 candidates even to appear in the recruitment process, such as Uttar
 Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. However on my writ petition (Mohib Anwar
 versus UP public service commission and state of Uttar Pradesh), they
 allow me to appear in the examination along with the facility of the
 scribe, but they were not agree on the point of reservation to
 visually impaired aspirents in judiciary.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This order is utterly disgusting: I contend even hundred per cent
 blind is fit for a Civil Court judge
 If this man approaches the Supreme Court and shows them evidences from
 US, South Africa and UK where blind judges hold reputed posts in
 Courts; I could hope that the highest Court of the land will pronounce
 judgment in his favour. Our judiciary should shed its contradictory
 approach while ensuring employment to persons with blindness. If a
 blind could become a parliamentarian and  join Indian executive then
 there is no doubt he/she is equally competent  to discharge his/her
 duty as a Civil Court Judge. India's former CCPD was a blind judge and
 exercised all rights as a Civil Court Judge.
 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Partial-blindness-shatters-mans-judge-dreams/articleshow/47578609.cms


 A person suffering from 70% blindness has failed to secure the post of
 a civil judge despite clearing the written examination and viva voce,
 as the Madras high court ruled that visual disability of more than the
 maximum permissible limit of 50% cannot be allowed for civil judges.

  Dismissing the writ petition of the aspirant V Surendra Mohan,
 Justice V Ramasubramanian said, Taking into account the nature of
 duties to be performed by the civil judge, the government, in
 consultation with the high court, had proposed to restrict the
 applicability of the benefit of reservation only to those whose
 disability ranges from 40-50%. If a person has not less than 40%
 blindness, he becomes eligible for the benefit of reservation. This
 fundamental and essential feature of the reservation is not taken away
 by the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment, while not depriving
 the benefit of reservation to those who come within the 

Re: [AI] CHENNAI: Partial blindness shatters man’s judge dreams

2015-06-08 Thread Mohib Anwar Rafay
Yes one thing is clear, if supreme court holds that any of such moves
which is based on arbitrary decision of the government, is infringing
the right of visually impaired person, even high court can not
exercise its discretionary administrative power while giving  its
ascent on such appointments. Cirtain states are open for the
appointments of visually impaired candidates as judges in lower
judiciary, such as Delhi and Haryana. Presently there are not less
than 5 judges who have been appointed in Haryana and Delhi judiciary
under visually impaired quota.

On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Actually in the matter of appointment of judges to lower judiciary,
 the things very much depends upon the high court of concern state
 itself. As it is the requirement under the constitution that while
 appointment to such judiciary the consultation from high court is
 necessary. Mean the high court in this respect is performing the
 administrative as wel judicial function. If you are aggrieved with the
 decision of the government for not providing the seat in lower
 judiciary, you will be before the same high court who didn't give its
 ascent for such appointment. So the matter is not that much easy.
 While conducting a hearing in my matter, on the plea of state counsel
 that such reservation can only be given after proper approval of high
 court itself, Allahabad high court observed that you (government)
 didn't come before us for any kind of such consultation.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This is an opportune time all blind lawyers practicing in several High
 Courts as well in the Supreme Court should write an open letter to the
 CJI and CC it to the PMO of India, And publicise this in the media.
 I'm sure things are gonna get better. One could also take on board the
 blind judge in one of districts in MP as reported in the news an year
 ago. I wish interested candidates don't miss this opportunity.




 On 6/8/15, umesh kasab umeshkasa...@gmail.com wrote:
 Supposedly most progressive organ of government falls prey to the
 simplest and straightest dictum-Its easy to preach than practice! What
 are the requirements of the job, by the way,  that disables the
 candidate from performing the duties in a proper way? Has this part
 got any mentioning in the verdict?

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what it all indicate: high-profile lawyers in the disability sector
 are at unease while taking on Courts for not complying to the law. A
 month ago, I read an article in the Bangalore Mirror that why Court
 premises and functioning are inaccessible to the blind and nobody
 raises questions. Perhaps our sector has sole hope from the judiciary
 to arrest our woes,hence nobody takes on the guardian of the
 Constitution. So lawyers are in a dilemma perhaps.


 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 High court may be right in its observation while dismissing the
 petition that the candidate didn't challenge the impugned circular of
 the government and participated in the recruitment process . However
 solely on this ground the relief to the petitioner can not be denyed
 anyways. Cirtainly the judgment is against the spirit of the principle
 of equality. Such judgment must be challenged in the supreme court.
 There are cirtain other states who don't allow visually impaired
 candidates even to appear in the recruitment process, such as Uttar
 Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. However on my writ petition (Mohib Anwar
 versus UP public service commission and state of Uttar Pradesh), they
 allow me to appear in the examination along with the facility of the
 scribe, but they were not agree on the point of reservation to
 visually impaired aspirents in judiciary.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This order is utterly disgusting: I contend even hundred per cent
 blind is fit for a Civil Court judge
 If this man approaches the Supreme Court and shows them evidences
 from
 US, South Africa and UK where blind judges hold reputed posts in
 Courts; I could hope that the highest Court of the land will
 pronounce
 judgment in his favour. Our judiciary should shed its contradictory
 approach while ensuring employment to persons with blindness. If a
 blind could become a parliamentarian and  join Indian executive then
 there is no doubt he/she is equally competent  to discharge his/her
 duty as a Civil Court Judge. India's former CCPD was a blind judge
 and
 exercised all rights as a Civil Court Judge.
 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Partial-blindness-shatters-mans-judge-dreams/articleshow/47578609.cms


 A person suffering from 70% blindness has failed to secure the post
 of
 a civil judge despite clearing the written examination and viva voce,
 as the Madras high court ruled that visual disability of more than
 the
 maximum permissible limit of 50% cannot be allowed for civil judges.

  Dismissing the writ 

Re: [AI] CHENNAI: Partial blindness shatters man’s judge dreams

2015-06-08 Thread Arjun Malhotra
Hi Mohib
Can I have your contact details Please?

On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Yes one thing is clear, if supreme court holds that any of such moves
 which is based on arbitrary decision of the government, is infringing
 the right of visually impaired person, even high court can not
 exercise its discretionary administrative power while giving  its
 ascent on such appointments. Cirtain states are open for the
 appointments of visually impaired candidates as judges in lower
 judiciary, such as Delhi and Haryana. Presently there are not less
 than 5 judges who have been appointed in Haryana and Delhi judiciary
 under visually impaired quota.

 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 Actually in the matter of appointment of judges to lower judiciary,
 the things very much depends upon the high court of concern state
 itself. As it is the requirement under the constitution that while
 appointment to such judiciary the consultation from high court is
 necessary. Mean the high court in this respect is performing the
 administrative as wel judicial function. If you are aggrieved with the
 decision of the government for not providing the seat in lower
 judiciary, you will be before the same high court who didn't give its
 ascent for such appointment. So the matter is not that much easy.
 While conducting a hearing in my matter, on the plea of state counsel
 that such reservation can only be given after proper approval of high
 court itself, Allahabad high court observed that you (government)
 didn't come before us for any kind of such consultation.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This is an opportune time all blind lawyers practicing in several High
 Courts as well in the Supreme Court should write an open letter to the
 CJI and CC it to the PMO of India, And publicise this in the media.
 I'm sure things are gonna get better. One could also take on board the
 blind judge in one of districts in MP as reported in the news an year
 ago. I wish interested candidates don't miss this opportunity.




 On 6/8/15, umesh kasab umeshkasa...@gmail.com wrote:
 Supposedly most progressive organ of government falls prey to the
 simplest and straightest dictum-Its easy to preach than practice! What
 are the requirements of the job, by the way,  that disables the
 candidate from performing the duties in a proper way? Has this part
 got any mentioning in the verdict?

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what it all indicate: high-profile lawyers in the disability sector
 are at unease while taking on Courts for not complying to the law. A
 month ago, I read an article in the Bangalore Mirror that why Court
 premises and functioning are inaccessible to the blind and nobody
 raises questions. Perhaps our sector has sole hope from the judiciary
 to arrest our woes,hence nobody takes on the guardian of the
 Constitution. So lawyers are in a dilemma perhaps.


 On 6/8/15, Mohib Anwar Rafay mohibra...@gmail.com wrote:
 High court may be right in its observation while dismissing the
 petition that the candidate didn't challenge the impugned circular of
 the government and participated in the recruitment process . However
 solely on this ground the relief to the petitioner can not be denyed
 anyways. Cirtainly the judgment is against the spirit of the
 principle
 of equality. Such judgment must be challenged in the supreme court.
 There are cirtain other states who don't allow visually impaired
 candidates even to appear in the recruitment process, such as Uttar
 Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. However on my writ petition (Mohib Anwar
 versus UP public service commission and state of Uttar Pradesh), they
 allow me to appear in the examination along with the facility of the
 scribe, but they were not agree on the point of reservation to
 visually impaired aspirents in judiciary.

 On 6/8/15, avinash shahi shahi88avin...@gmail.com wrote:
 This order is utterly disgusting: I contend even hundred per cent
 blind is fit for a Civil Court judge
 If this man approaches the Supreme Court and shows them evidences
 from
 US, South Africa and UK where blind judges hold reputed posts in
 Courts; I could hope that the highest Court of the land will
 pronounce
 judgment in his favour. Our judiciary should shed its contradictory
 approach while ensuring employment to persons with blindness. If a
 blind could become a parliamentarian and  join Indian executive then
 there is no doubt he/she is equally competent  to discharge his/her
 duty as a Civil Court Judge. India's former CCPD was a blind judge
 and
 exercised all rights as a Civil Court Judge.
 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Partial-blindness-shatters-mans-judge-dreams/articleshow/47578609.cms


 A person suffering from 70% blindness has failed to secure the post
 of
 a civil judge despite clearing the written examination and viva
 voce,
 as the Madras high court ruled that visual