B.B.Mangalmurti, J. - (1.) Instant appeal has been preferred against the order dated 8th March, 2017 passed by learned Single Judge dismissing her prayer for appointment under VH category.
(2.) The short fact of the case is that Jharkhand Academic Council issued an Advertisement No. 93 of 2011 dated 12th October, 2011 inviting application for appointment of Assistant Teacher in upgraded secondary schools against which the appellant applied in the category of subject Urdu. The total number of 134 vacancies were shown under different categories that include vacancy for unreserved, scheduled caste, scheduled tribe, extremely backward class and backward class. The appellant applied and after getting admit card, she appeared at the examination. The further case is that appellant being visually handicapped (V.H.) had a medical certificate of about 40% visually handicapped in the nature of permanent disability. Appellant also being physically handicapped due to polio in both the legs for which Medical Board, Godda had issued a certificate showing her 70% of permanent disability. After declaration of result, appellant did not find her name in the final list of successful candidate in the category of physically handicapped.
(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant that out of 134 vacancies in Urdu subject, 4 seats were reserved for physically handicapped persons, 2 seats for visually handicapped, 1 seat for hearing impairment and 1 seat for O.H. (locomotor disability). The appellant was 40% visual disable and she has secured 181 marks but her name was not included in the final list of successful candidate. The admitted position is that appellant was declared successful when the result was published at the first instance by Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi but later on the council made variation and alteration in the number of vacancies earmarked for physically handicapped category under visually handicapped (V.H.) hearing impairment (H.H.) and locomotor disability (O.H.). The appellant had submitted her preference under O.H. locomotor disability and she was declared successful but after alteration in the vacancy position, respondent-authorities without inviting fresh preference under the physically handicapped quota, the final results were published. The appellant was also under visually handicapped quota and one seat was also vacant in spite of that the appellant was deprived from appointment on that quota of post.;