IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14246 of 2009 SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH, Son of Chandra Sekhar Singh, resident of village-Nawada, P.S.-Jalalpur, District-Saran. ……..Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. 3. District Magistrate, Saran. 4. District Superintendent of Education, Saran. 5. Praveen Kumar Sinha, Son of Sri Awadhesh Kumar Mishra, resident of village-Sewai Bazar, P.S.-Jalalpur, District-Saran. 6. Pramod Kumar Tewary, Son of Janardan Tewary, resident of village+ P.S,-Jalalapur, District-Saran. 7. District Teachers Engagement Appellate Tribunal, Saran. ………Respondents. For the petitioner: (1) Mr. Ganesh Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv. (2) Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Adv. -------------- 2/ 01.02.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. Petitioner’s prayer is for quashing of order dated 18.09.2009 passed in Case No. 632 of 2009 by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Saran, contained in Memo No. 533 dated 18.09.2009. By the impugned order, petitioner’s appointment on the post of Panchayat Teacher has been cancelled and a direction has been issued to re-hold the counselling for appointment on the reserved post in the disabled category by 31.10.2009. On perusal of the impugned order, I find that the appellate authority has considered the case of the petitioner vis- à-vis Praveen Kumar Sinha and others in the right perspective. Petitioner was appointed on un-reserved post under the disabled category considering his marks to be 80% when - 2 - actually petitioner’s mark was 40%. In this view, the petitioner was not entitled for being appointed on un-reserved post. So far the reserved post for disabled category is concerned, the other applicants Pramod Kumar Tiwary and Praveen Kumar Sinha had higher marks than the petitioner. The appellate authority has rightly directed that fresh counseling as per the advertisement be made for appointment in the reserved category. In case, in the advertisement it is provided for a particular category of disabled person, whosoever is entitled to be appointed in that category. The Appointment Committee will consider and decide the matter of selection, accordingly. I find no error in the impugned order. This application is disposed of. Sanjeet/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)