- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

L.P.A. No.95 of 2019

----

Gopal Chandra Mandal, Aged about 53 years, S/o Shri

Naresh Chandra Mandal, R/o Barman Colony, Rajmahal,

P.O. & P.S. Rajmahal, Distt. Sahibganj.

…

… Appellant/Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Human

Resource

Development

Department,

Government

of

Jharkhand, Ranchi, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur,

Distt. – Ranchi.

2. Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi, Gyandeep Campus,

Bargawan,

Namkom,

Ranchi-834010

through

its

Secretary, Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi, P.O. &

P.S. Namkum, Distt. – Ranchi.

3. Sarita Kumari, W/D/o Not known

4. Subhra Bharti, W/D/o Not known

5. Vijayanand Tewary, S/o Not known

Resp. No. 3 to 5 represented through Secretary, Human

Resource Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand,

Ranchi, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, Distt. – Ranchi

…

… Respondents/Respondents

-------

CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

------

For the Appellant

: Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate

Mr. Gautam Kumar Singh, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, G.A.-I.

For the Resp. JAC

: Mr. Anil Kumar, Senior Advocate

Mrs. Richa Sanchita, Advocate

For the Respondent No.3 : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate

For the Respondent No.4 : Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate

For the Respondent No.5 : Mr. Shailesh, Advocate

--------

ORAL JUDGMENT

Order No.25 : Dated 21^st June, 2022

The instant appeal, preferred under Clause 10 of the

Letters Patent, is directed against the order/judgment dated

10.12.2018 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in

- 2 -

W.P.(S) No.4251 of 2012 whereby and whereunder the writ

petition has been dismissed declining to pass positive direction

in favour of the writ petitioner for his appointment on the post

of Post Graduate Teacher in the physically handicapped

category.

2.

Brief facts of the case as per the pleadings made in the

writ proceeding, which are required to be enumerated herein,

read as under :-

The

respondent

authorities

came

out

with

an

advertisement inviting applications for appointment on the post

of Post Graduate Teachers in +2 Schools. The writ petitioner

had applied under MBC category by specifically mentioning in

the application form that he belongs to physically challenged

category. The admit card was not issued on the ground that he

was over-aged. Aggrieved thereof, he represented before State

Disabled Commissioner, whereupon though admit card was

issued but again in the admit card the Physically Handicapped

category i.e. PH, in which the petitioner belongs was left out.

However, the writ petitioner participated in the examination but

when the result was published, the name of the petitioner was

not found in the select list. However, the writ petitioner after

downloading his result from the website, could be able to know

that in Paper I, he has obtained 43.5 marks and in Paper II he

has obtained 170 marks. Thereafter, the writ petitioner got

information

from

enquiry

that

physically

handicapped

- 3 -

candidates having less than 170 marks have been appointed

and the petitioner has been left out.

The writ petitioner, in view of the aforesaid information,

approached this Court by invoking the jurisdiction conferred to

this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

seeking therein a direction upon the respondents to appoint the

writ petitioner on the post of Post Graduate Teacher under PH

category.

The writ petitioner has taken the ground that even though

the advertisement stipulates that there shall be 3% horizontal

reservation for the physically challenged candidates and out of

total 230 vacancies, 8 posts falls under the reserved category of

physically handicapped. Further, the writ petitioner belongs to

Most Backward Category and as per the