IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 13620 of 2008 Pankaj Kumar Thakur, son of Sri Sarangdhar Thakur, resident of Village – Deendayalpur, P O – Mamsai, P S – Sahadai, District – Vaishali - Petitioner Versus 1 The State of Bihar 2 The District Superintendent of Education, District – Vaishali 3 The Block Development Officer, Sahadai Buzurg, District – Vaishali 4 The Block Education Extension Officer, Sahadai Buzurg, District – Vaishali 5 The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat – Salha, Block – Shadai Buzurg, District – Vaishali 6 The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat – Salha, Block – Shadai Buzurg, District – Vaishali 7 The Headmaster, Utkramit Madhya Vidyalaya, Dubha, P O – Pohiyar, Block – Sahadei Buzurg, District – Vaishali - Respondents *** For the petitioner : Mr Rajendra Prasad Singh, Sr Advocate With M/s Rajeev Kr Singh & Navjot Yeshu, Advocates For the respondents : Mr Suman Kr Jha, AC to AAG - 5 *** 8 12.05.2011 The petitioner was selected and appointed as Panchayat Shikchak (Panchayat Teacher) on the quota reserved for physically handicapped. By the impugned order, his appointment has been cancelled on the ground that he does not qualify under the said quota. Mr Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had not concealed any fact at the time when he made the application. He had enclosed therewith the handicapped certificate duly issued by the Medical Board constituted by the Civil Surgeon. It was for the authorities to take a decision in the matter and they having decided to appoint the petitioner, the appointment cannot now be cancelled. In my view, that is not the situation. The situation here is with regard to fulfilment of the eligibility condition itself. To be eligible 2 to be considered as a physically handicapped person (proper expression is physically challenged), one must have physical disability of minimum 40%. That is not in dispute. As per the physical disability certificate of the petitioner itself, the disability is only to the extent of 15%. Thus, petitioner cannot be a physically challenged person for the purposes of the said appointment. Lacking the basic qualification renders the appointment void ab initio. No provision is shown to me which authorises the Selection Committee to relax the Rules in that regard. In that view of the matter, I find no merit in this application. It is, accordingly, dismissed. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)