- (1.) ALTHOUGH on last occasion, an order was passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court whereby two weeks time was granted to respondent RPSC to file reply subject to the payment of Rs.2000 as costs.
(2.) TODAY , learned counsel for the petitioner submits that still no reply has been filed by respondent Commission, therefore, case may be heard in absence of reply. In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking direction to quash the advertisement dated 27.8.2007 (Annex.5) with prayer that respondents may be directed to provide reservation to the disabled candidates like petitioner in the advertisement and consider the application of the petitioner under category of disabled candidate and not in OBC for appoitnment on the post of Nurse Grade-II.
(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, it emerges from the facts that with open eyes petitioner participated in the selection process initiated by the respondent Commission vide advertisement dated 27.8.2007 in which 34 posts were advertised under the category of disabled persons. In this case, the petitioner is claiming his right of consideration on the ground that a separate reservation for OBC disabled is not provided. In the opinion of this Court, the reservation for the disabled candidate is to be given on horizontal basis and not on vertical basis, therefore, no separate reservation of disabled candidates for each category is required, therefore, the prayer of the petitioner for quashing the advertisement is not sustainable in law.;