A.i. Confederation of the Blind and anr. Vs. U.O.i. (Union of India) and anr.

.....vendors for a period of 12 years and more, prior to the suit. [air 2002 madras 213, reversed]. clause 15: [r.v. raveendran & lokeshwar singh panta, jj] letters patent appeal -re-appreciation of evidence and reversal of concurrent finding of facts held, it is true that powers of letters patent bench is not limited to questions of law, and that it has the same power which the single judge has, as a first appellate court in respect of both questions of law and fact. however, in the absence of cogent reasons, letters patent bench would not differ from a finding of fact recorded by a single judge. where the trial court and the first appellate court have considered the evidence thoroughly and have based their concurrent findings on the evidence, the letters patent bench should be slow in interfering with such findings. where in the suit for declaration of title and possession neither title of plaintiff, nor previous possession of plaintiff, nor encroachment by defendants was made out and the letters patent bench interfered with the well reasoned judgments of the trial court and first appellate court which were based on concurrent finding of facts, without justification, and in the absence of any clear and acceptable evidence, the interference by letters patent bench was unwarranted and the order of the letters patent bench is liable to be set aside, and the judgment and decree of the single judge confirming the dismissal of the suit is liable to be restored. [air 2002 madras 213, reversed]. indian evidence act, 1872 section 101: [r.v. raveendran & lokeshwar singh panta,jj] suit for declaration of title and possession held, burden of proof is on plaintiff to make out his title and entitlement to possession. he cannot succeed on any alleged weakness in title or possession of defendant. [air 2002 madras 213, reversed]. - therefore, all such blind/low-vision persons who belonged to sc, st vertical category would automatically enjoy the benefit of 5%..........participation) act, 1995 for the visually handicapped persons.2. the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the chief commissioner for persons with disabilities as set out in the following terms : '.....3. it is humbly submitted that in pursuance of section 32 of the persons with disabilities act (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation) act, 1995, the appropriate government (government of india) has updated the list of identified posts. this list has been issued vide extraordinary gazette notification no. 178 dated 30.6.2001. in this list, the posts of university/college/school teacher for the blind and low-vision have been listed at sl. nos. 24-27 on page no. 592. 4. ..... 5. ..... 6. the chief commissioner for person with disabilities has taken cognizance of the arrangements provided by the university grants commission for persons with disabilities by way of extending 5% relaxation in cut-off marks, appearing in the net for junior research fellowship and lecturership. thus, the arrangement extended by ugc is in consonance with the policy stand taken by government of india insofar as relaxation in minimum standard is concerned. relaxation in standards has been favoured only when the candidates belonging to reserved categoriesare not available on the basis of the general standard to fill all the vacancies reserved for them. 7. the relaxation extended to sc & st candidates as per maintenance of standard 1998 of the universities, provides for a 5% relaxation from 55% to 50% in the marks obtained at master's degree. since reservation for the disabled is called horizontal reservation which cuts across all vertical categories such as sc, st, obc & general. therefore, all such blind/low-vision persons who belonged to sc, st vertical category would automatically enjoy the benefit of 5% relaxation at the minimum qualifying marks obtained at master's degree level. thus, only the blind and low-vision belonging to obc and general categories are.....