IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO :12576 of 2007 DATED:28.6.2007. Between: G.Ramamohan Reddy .... PETITIONER AND State of A.P. rep by its Chief Secretary & another .....RESPONDENTs THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO:12576 OF 2007 ORDER: (Per the Honourable Smt.Justice T.Meenakumari) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to call for the records pertaining to the order of the tribunal in O.A.No:2339 of 2006, dated 20.11.2006 and to set aside the same by holding as illegal and to direct the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to any post of A.P.P.S.C. group I services by treating him as Handicapped category person. The petitioner is the applicant. He filed the O.A. seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his case for the appointment of A.P.P.S.C. Group I Posts as per notification No:21/2003 and 6 of 2004 under the handicapped category by calling for interview by reserving the post according to the ratio of clarified by the various Government orders particularly G.O.Ms.No:252, dated 28.8.2004. On the submission made by the learned Standing counsel that at the time of issuing the noticication Nos.21 of 2003 and 6 of 2004, five vacancies were notified towards physically handicapped quota and consequent to the disposal of W.P.6223 of 2006, the respondent Government identified another 15 posts and they were also notified and the applicant did not come up for consideration against the physically handicapped quota and he belonged to visually handicapped quota, the tribunal having come to the conclusion that the O.A. has become infructuous, disposed of the same accordingly. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed by the applicant. Heard the learned counsel. A detailed counter has been filed by the 2nd respondent contending that as per the ratio 1:2, four visually handicapped candidates were called for the interview for two vacancies and the last candidate who was admitted for interview in the V.H. category has secured 489 marks and the applicant has secured only 402 marks and therefore, the applicant is not a qualified candidate for the interview to his low merit and therefore, the relief sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted. In the present facts and circumstances of the case and by considering the contentions raised in the counter filed by the 2nd respondent, We feel that the relief sought for by the applicant cannot be granted. As such, We see no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. (JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI) 28th June, 2007 (JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH) gurc/nn THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO:12576 of 2007 (Order delivered by the Honourable Smt.Justice T.Meena Kumari) 28th June, 2007.