The main legal point established is that reservation for physically handicapped persons in the U. P. Nyayik Sewa is 3%, but candidates must be in good mental and bodily health and free from any physical defect likely to interfere with the efficient performance of their duties.

( 1 ) THIS Writ Petition No. 7530 of 1998 and connected Writ Petition No. 39142 of 1999, Writ petition No. 39556 of 1994 and Writ Petition No. 20185 of 1998 involve a common question and hence, are being disposed of by a common judgment.

( 2 ) THE petitioner alleged that he is a physically handicapped person and he has prayed for benefit for reservation for physically handicapped persons in the P. C. S. (J) Examination, 1997. The petitioner has stated that he was born on 1. 7. 1965 and has done LL. B. It is alleged that he is fully qualified and eligible to appear in P. C. S. (J), 1997. In the advertisement copy of which annexure-2 Inviting application for the P. C. S. (J), there is no provision for reservation for physically handicapped persons although it is alleged that there is such reservation for appointment in other State services. The petitioner applied in response to the advertisement. It is alleged that reservation in all public services exists in favour of physically handicapped candidates under the provisions of U. P. Public Service (Reservation in favour of Physically handicapped, Dependant of Freedom Fighters and Ex-servicemen) Act. 1993, (U. P. Act No. 4 of 1993 ). Under Section 3 (2) of the said Act, 5% combined reservations have been mentioned in favour of physically handicapped persons and dependent of freedom fighters and ex-serviceman in accordance with the Government notification as may be issued by the State Government in this regard. In exercise of power under the aforesaid provisions, the State Government issued a notification dated 4. 5. 1995 providing 2% reservation in favour of physically handicapped persons. Subsequently by U. P. Act No. 6 of 1997 the reservation for physically handicapped persons has been raised to 3%. A similar reservation has been made under Section 33 of The persons with Disabilities, (Equal Opportunity, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act. 1995 (Parliamentary Act No. 1 of 1996 ).

( 3 ) A counter-affidavit has been filed by Sri T. M. Khan on behalf of the High Court. In para 4 of the counter-affidavit, it is stated that in 1978 the U. P. Government desired Introduction of reservation for physically handicapped persons in judicial service. The matter was referred to the Administrative Committee of the High Court and in its meeting dated 8. 12. 1979, it was resolved that considering the nature of work done by judicial officers. It will not be advisable that any reservation be made for physically handicapped person in Judicial service. This decision of the Court was communicated to the Government of U. P. by letter dated 12. 2. 1980. The same decision was reiterated by the Administrative Committee in Its meeting on 31. 1,1981 communicated to the State Government on 11. 2. 1981. The State Government again requested to the Court for reconsideration of the matter and the Court by decision dated 20. 1. 1982 reiterated its opinion. Hence the State Government by order dated 24. 7. 1982, communicated to the registrar of the High Court that the recommendation of the High Court was accepted by the governor and there should be no reservation for physically handicapped persons in the U. P. Civil Judicial Service. True copy of the decision of the Court and Government order dated 24. 7. 1982 are Annexures-CA-1 and CA-2.

( 4 ) IN para 7 of the counter-affidavit, it is stated that a Committee appointed by the Chief Justice submitted a report on 8. 7. 1991 to Honble the Chief Justice to the effect that there should be no reservation for physically handicapped persons in Judicial service. This report was laid before the Full Court which on 25. 7. 1992 resolved that the matter be reconsidered by a Committee of three Judges. In para 9, it is stated that the State Government sent fresh draft rules to the High court, namely, U. P. Judicial Service Rules, 1995, in the light of the Judgment of the Supreme court in State of U. P. v. Rafiquddin and Ors. , All India Judges Associat