A special bench of the HC was hearing a plea by one Vinayak Kashid seeking modification to the advertisement issued by MahaTransco in May this year for mass recruitment.
The Bombay High Court Tuesday sought a reply from the state government and the Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd. (MSETCL) on a plea by a transgender person, seeking direction to the company to provide reservation in jobs for the transgender community.
A special bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice A A Sayed was hearing a plea by one Vinayak Kashid, a graduate in Electrical Engineering and a post graduate in Technology (Electrical Power System Engineering) course, seeking modification to the advertisement issued by MahaTransco in May this year for mass recruitment.
-
The petitioner claimed that she came across an advertisement issued by MahaTransco on May 4 to recruit Assistant Engineers (Transmission) on 170 vacant posts. The petitioner, through advocate Kranti L C submitted the form. However, before form submission, she noted that the advertisement was in breach of Supreme Court judgment in the National Legal Services Authority Vs Union of India case, which had recognised several rights for transgender community. The top court had ordered states to reserve some seats in government jobs for transgender persons.
-
However, Kashid claimed there was no reservation for transgender persons. Aggrieved by the exclusion of the community, Kashid approached the concerned authorities. However, there was no response, prompting her to approach the high court. Kashid said the recruitment advertisement violated fundamental rights given by Constitution and therefore the court shall pass a direction to the company to reserve posts for transgender persons and pending hearing, stay the recruitment notice.
-
Advocate Abhijeet Joshi for respondent company and additional government pleader Manish Pabale for state sought two weeks’ time to file a reply, which the court granted and asked the petitioner to file a rejoinder within a week thereafter.
The bench granted liberty to the petitioner to apply for interim relief, if the date of examination for recruitment is fixed by the respondent company prior to the next date of hearing of July 19.
Source: The Indian Express
