- (1.) HEARD Mr. Anil Kumar Dubey for the appellant, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri V. P. Mishra appears for respondent No. 6.
(2.) THE appeal raises question with respect to the interpretation of the clarification issued by the State Government on 24th April, 2006 to clarify the earlier Government circular dated 10th October, 2005. THE matter requires consideration. The appeal is admitted. Considering the facts and urgency of the case, the appeal is heard forthwith. The short facts leading to this appeal are as follows :
(3.) THE appellant was selected to the post of a Shiksha Mitra. She has secured 64. 46 marks as per the method provided for selection under the Government orders. THE respondent No. 6 who was second in the list, had obtained 64. 40 marks and that is why the appellant came to be selected. Now it so transpires that respondent No. 6 represented to the authorities concerned on the basis of the Government clarification dated 24th April, 2006. His case is that he is a handicapped person and under the particular clarification if it is applied he would be getting 68. 55 marks. Therefore, he should have been selected.;