1 2025:CGHC:22786-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 331 of 2025 Sanjay Kumar Markam S/o Ram Chandra Markam Aged About 39 Years (In The Impugned Order 37 Years Mentioned),r/o College Road,surajpur, Distt. Surajpur (C.G.) ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of General Administration Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Social Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Director Directorate Of Social Welfare, Samaj Kalyan Premises, Mana Camp, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Under Secretary General Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Director Directorate Of Health Services Chhattisgarh, Swasthya Bhawan, North Block, Sector 19, Nava Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anand Shukla, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, G.A. and Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Advocate MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.06.11 10:32:10 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 10.06.2025 1. The office has raised an objection that the writ appeal against an interim order is not maintainable. 2. Heard Mr. Anand Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for respondent/State as well as Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, learned counsel for respective respondents. 3. The appellant has filed this writ appeal with I.A. No.01/2025 i.e. application for grant of interim relief with following prayer: “It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this application and stay the effect and operation of the order dated 02.05.2025, so far it relates to the medical examination of the petitioner, till the final disposal of the instant case in the interest of justice.” 4. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is physically disable person by the reason of hearing impairment. As per the provision of person with disabilities act, 2016 (herein after called the Act, 2016 for brevity) and the Person with Disability (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 has been issued with disability certificate by the competent authority. The appellant has been earlier in 2018 selected on the 3 post of Food Inspector in S.T. (PWD) category and thereafter in 2019 has been selected as Deputy Collector in Hard of Hearing sub category in PWD category. Both the selection process was by the Public Service Commission in which the PSC and concerned department both have scrutinized and verified the disability certificate of appellant and only thereafter the appellant has been appointed. One Chhattisgarh Divyang Seva Sangh has been persistently raising unfounded complaints before various departments of the State Government, causing the bona fide appointments of disabled individuals to be repeatedly questioned and harassed. The Chhattisgarh Divyang Seva Sangh had also filed a PIL before this Court bearing registration number W.P. (P.I.L.) No. 36/2023, wherein this Court directed the Chief Secretary to file a personal affidavit explaining why no positive steps have been taken to verify the physical disability certificates. In a complete misinterpretation of the order dated 24.04.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.(P.I.L.) 36/2023, the appellant, who is appointed under the Physical Disability quota, was once again directed to undergo verification of his disability. The appellant aggrieved by the issuance of the said direction approached this Court, and this Hon'ble Court had granted interim protection to the appellant by order dated 19.06.2023. The concerned Chief Secretary has also filed his personal affidavit in this regard and has clearly stated that the District Medical Board would be the competent authority, which shall consist of expert persons with 4 respect to grant of such disability certificate. The said WPPIL 36/2023 was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 12.12.2023. In the name of WP(PIL) No. 36/2023, the respondent No.4 issued direction on 16.05.2023 to the appellant directing him to submit fresh disability certificate under Section 91 of the Act of 2016 from the State Medical Board and submit the renewed disability certificate by 22.05.2023. On 18.05.2023 the respondent No. 4 directed the respondent No. 5 to fix the date and time for examination of appellant and 3 others by the State Medical Board and forward the result to the department. The appellant submitted his renewed disability certificate on 22.05.2023. Thereafter, the appellant made representation explaining the legal provision involved in violation and requested for cancelling and dropping the whole charade of examination by the Medical Board, but the authorities are adamant that the appellant must obtain a fresh disability certificate and submit himself for re-examination before the State Level Medical Board. Thus against the arbitrary and malafide behaviour of the respondent authorities, the appellant has approached this Court by way W.P.(S) No. 3472/2023. This Court vide order dated 19.06.2023 in W.P.(S) No. 3472/2023 directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against appellant. 5. However, on 2.5.2025, the Writ Court modified the interim order and granted liberty to the respondents to proceed against the appellant and other selected candidates but they have been restrained from taking a final decision without the leave of the 5 Court. Further, a direction was issued for the medical examination of the appellant and other similarly selected candidates strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (for short "Act of 2016") in a fair and transparent manner. The Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare has been directed to constitute a State Medical Board for examination of the appellant and other selected candidates and to submit its report. The appellant has challenged the order dated 2.5.2025 by filing this writ appeal. 6. With regard to the maintainability of the writ appeal, Mr. Shukla would submit that the writ appeal is maintainable in light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Full Bench in the case of Ajay Jagarnath vs. State of Chhattisgarh, AIR 2017 CHHATTISGARH 45, wherein it is held that the order vitally affecting the right of the parties having bearing on the final adjudication, though interim at the interim stage is not pure interlocutory order and an appeal would lie against it. He would further submit that earlier the disability certificate of the appellant was duly verified by the expert committee and there is no need for re-examination or scrutiny of the said document. Therefore, there was no need for modification of the interim order granted on 19.6.2023. He would pray to allow the writ appeal. 7. On the other hand, learned Advocates appearing for the respondents would oppose the submissions made by counsel for 6 the appellant. They would submit that the interim order/protection is still operating in favour of the appellant. It is argued that the Writ Court has issued a direction for the medical examination of the appellant and other similarly situated persons. They would contend that as there is no order affecting the rights of the appellant, this appeal is not maintainable. 8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on the record. 9. Admittedly, there is a dispute with regard to the disability certificate issued in favour of the appellant. The appellant has been earlier in 2018 selected on the post of Food Inspector in S.T. (PWD) category and thereafter in 2019 has been selected as Deputy Collector in Hard of Hearing sub category in PWD category. A complaint was made and the certificate of the appellant and other selected candidates was examined by a three member committee. A report was submitted and findings were recorded in favour of the appellant and other selected candidates. It appears that the disability certificates and persons suffering from disabilities were not examined by the Medical Board or any expert body, therefore, the department issued show-cause notices to the appellant and other selected candidates and those notices were challenged by filing various writ petitions. The Writ Court vide order dated 19.06.2023 passed a protective order in favour of the appellant and other selected candidates. Vide order dated 7 2.5.2025, the writ Court permitted the State to continue with the proceedings but restrained them from passing the final order and in the meanwhile, directed the Secretary, Department of Health of Family Welfare to constitute a State Medical Board for examination of the appellant and other selected candidates and to submit a report. 10. The appellant has not assailed the interim order passed in the writ petition dated 2.5.2025 rather he has sought a part stay, which cannot be granted. A perusal of the order dated 2.5.2025 would show that the interim order is still operating in favour of the appellant. No order has been passed affecting his rights, therefore, the writ appeal is not maintainable. The appellant would be at liberty to raise all the grounds available to him before the writ Court. 11. Accordingly, in our opinion, the present appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet