Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

This order will dispose of WP(C) Nos. 1161/2010, 2638/2012 and 2883/2012.

2. The three writ petitions were heard together as the subject matters are identical. Accordingly the above three writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order.

3. Heard Ms. R.S. Choudhury, learned Counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.1161/2010, Mr. B.D. Goswami, learned Counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.2638/2012 and Mr. U.K. Das, learned Counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No.2883/2012. Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. M.H. Ansari, learned Counsel have appeared for the Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, Government of Assam. Mr. Ansari has also produced the relevant record for perusal of the Court. Mr. F.U. Barbhuyan, learned Counsel has appeared for one of the private respondents Harun Al Rashid.

Writ Petition (C) No.1161/2010

4. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Shri Akhil Das seeks a direction to the respondents to commence the selection process from the stage of viva-voce test by inviting the petitioner to appear in the viva-voce test. Further direction sought for is to make adequate reservation in the selection process for persons with disabilities in conformity with the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995.

5. Case of the petitioner as projected in the writ petition is that he suffers from locomotor disability, which is an orthopaedic disability, to the extent of 50%. Despite his disability, he had completed his graduation and is also proficient in type writing as well as in computer application.

6. Director of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, Assam (for short "Director") had issued advertisement dated 16-08-2008 inviting applications from eligible candidates to fill up 145 vacancies in the post of Sub-Inspector. Qualification prescribed was graduation in Arts or Commerce or Science from any recognised University. 3% percent of the notified vacancies were reserved for persons with disabilities.

7. Being eligible and interested, petitioner responded to the said advertisement by applying against the vacancies earmarked for physically handicapped persons. Written examination was held on 28-12-2008 wherein petitioner had appeared. Result of the written examination was published on 27-07-2009 and a total of 1327 candidates belonging to different categories were declared successful. Thereafter viva-voce test was scheduled between 10-08-2009 to 03-09-2009.

8. Petitioner's name was not included in the list of successful candidates of the written examination. Therefore he was not called to appear in the viva-voce test.

9. In response to application filled by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, 2005, he was informed by respondent No.3 that he had obtained 55½ marks in the written examination. Thereafter, further information was furnished to the petitioner whereby it was stated that a total of 10 physically handicapped candidates were called for written test and equal numbers were called for oral interview. It was further stated that the post of Sub-Inspector has been notified for orthopaedic disability only. Cut off marks for physically handicapped candidate was 39.

10. Grievance of the petitioner is that he had obtained 55½ marks in the written examination, yet he was not selected for the viva-voce test though the cut off marks for physically handicapped candidates short listed for the viva-voce test was only 39. Thus non-selection of the petitioner for viva-voce test was illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable.

11. Aggrieved, present writ petition has been filed seeking the relief as indicated above.

12. An additional affidavit was filed by the petitioner on 04-02- 2015. It is stated that as per information furnished by the Joint Director on 20-01-2015, a total number of 145 candidates were selected by the Selection Committee for