GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS, J.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner having 80% physical disability for seeking direction to modify the final result notice dated 15.11.2016 and to consider her candidature under physically handicapped category against one unfilled post reserved for physically handicapped category candidate and to decide the representation dated 28.11.2016 (Annex. 11) in accordance with law and provide appointment on the post of Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate against post of Civil Judge Cadre kept reserved for the physically handicapped category.

2. As per facts of the case, the petitioner acquired qualification of graduation from Maharaja Ganga Singh University, Bikaner in the year 2006 and further acquired qualification of L.L.B. in the year 2009 and L.L.M. in the year 2011 from the same University. The petitioner faced eye sight problem, therefore, after examination of her eyes by the medical board of three doctors of PMB Hospital, Bikaner. The Board declared that she is having 80% disability and issued certificate Annex. 5 of permanent disability on 5.7.2010.

3. The petitioner being eligible to appear in the competitive examination of Civil Judge Cadre applied under the category of physically handicapped category in the Rajasthan Judicial Service year 2013 and she was allowed to appear under the category of persons with disability in the preliminary examination and after getting requisite marks in preliminary examination, allowed to appear in main examination under roll no. 3843. Under aforesaid roll number she appeared in the main examination held on 14-15.6.2014. In the said competitive examination, cut off marks for the category of physically disabled candidate was not declared, therefore, preferred DBCWP NO. 8364/2014 against non-declaration of cut off marks of the persons with disability category, however, the said writ petition was withdrawn.

4. In the year 2016 again 72 posts were advertised for appointment on the post of Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate in Civil Judge Cadre by the respondents and out of 72 vacancies, 2 vacancies were kept reserved for persons with disabilities as per the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection and Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and Rajasthan Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection and Rights and Full Participation) Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1995 and the Rules of 2011 for short). The petitioner having requisite qualification again applied in pursuance of the said advertisement for direct recruitment to the post of Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate in Civil Judge Cadre. In the online application form submitted by the petitioner in column no. 2.4 filled up her category as “general”, but inadvertently by mistake, mentioned “no” against column no. 3.1 which is meant for the person with disability (differently abled). The petitioner was allowed to appear in the preliminary examination and declared successful to appear in the main examination and allowed by the respondents High Court to appear in the main examination while issuing admission card of roll no. 5046.

5. The petitioner appeared in the main examination, the result of main examination was declared on 15.11.2016. In the said notice the respondents disclosed the cut off marks of each category including persons with disabilities category. The said notice of result is placed on record as Annex. 10, in which cut off marks for persons with disabilities category was shown as 138 marks and petitioner obtained total 136 marks, therefore, her name was placed at S. No. 137 in the final result notice dated 15.11.2016.

6. It is submitted by the petitioner that in the notice of final result dated 15.11.2016 only one candidate Renu Motwani (S. No. 57) was considered for appointment under the category of disable persons in spite of the fact that two posts were kept reserved for physically handicapped category candidates. After decl