IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14931 of 2008 DEEPAK KUMAR MISHRA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, Senior advocate and Mr. Dilip Kr., Tewari For the B.P.S.C.: Mr. Lalit Kishore,Sr.Advocate For the State: Mr. R.B.N.Singh, J.C. to S.C.X -------- 4. 30.1.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State and B.P.S.C. Learned A.A.G.3 submits that he has filed a counter affidavit on behalf of B.P.S.C.on 21.8.2008. The same is not available on record. The Court therefore requested the counsel for the parties to make available their copy for perusal. On perusal of the same, this Court is satisfied that the non-availability of counter affidavit need not hold up the disposal of this writ application, in the nature of the order proposed to be passed. The office is however, directed to place the counter affidavit on file for the purposes of record. The admitted facts are that the petitioner applied in response to an advertisement no.1/06 by the Commission inviting applications, for appointment on the post of Assistant Engineer under the Road Construction Department, Public Health 2 Engineering Department and Water Resources Department. In accordance with the number of posts 3% i.e. 9 vacancies were reserved for physically handicapped candidate. There are still vacancies in that category. The petitioner who claims to belong to be physically handicapped applied as such in general category. He succeeded in the written test and interview letter was also issued to him. The petitioner is aggrieved by the denial of appointment to him on the perception of the respondents that he was not physically handicapped. The petitioner, inter alia, has placed reliance on the certificates issued to him by the Department of Rehabilitation, Patna Medical College dated 4.10.2005 at Annexure-2 and also that issued by the Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer dated 17.5.2008 in pursuance of his physical examination by a medical board constituted for the purpose as contained at Annexure-8. The respondents in their counter affidavit have relied upon the report of their own medical board at the time of interview as appended at Annexure-B to the counter affidavit. It contains a series of questions where the answers have simply been written as „yes‟ or „no‟. In column 8, the question is, “Are there any sign of disease of bones, joint or part 3 connected therewith.” The answer written in hand by the Board is „no‟. To this Court there is apparent conflict between the report of the medical board at the time of interview vide Annexure-B to the counter affidavit and that of the Patna Medical College dated 4.10.2005 at Annexure-2 as also of the medical board constituted by the Civil Surgeon at Annexure-8. The two are more specific and disclose the extent of the disability and the nature of the disability. The order dated 8.8.2008 at Annexure-11 refusing to consider the candidature of the petitioner for that reason is accordingly set aside. The matter is remanded to the Commission to take a fresh decision by reconciliation of Annexure-B to the counter affidavit with Annexures-2 and 8 to the writ application. Let such appropriate decision be taken in accordance with law within a maximum period of eight weeks from the receipt of a copy of this Court. The writ application stands allowed. (Navin Sinha,J.) AI