IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1997 of 2010. ----------- Manju Kumari W/O Ramdeo Prasad R/O Pradeep General Store, Purab Bazar, P.S.-Saharsa, Distt.-Saharsa…. Appellant. Versus 1. The Union Of India Through Secretary, Rehabilitation Council Of India-B-22, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi- 110006. 2. The Director, N.I.V.H.Dehradum-116, Rajpur Road, Uttar Pradesh. 3. The Deputy Director Cum Co-Ordinator, Social Welfare Deptt. Patna. 4. The Secretary, Handicapped Deptt. Irrigation Building, New Secretariat, Patna. 5. The Chairman, Rehabilitation Council Of India, B-22 Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi-110016. 6. The Incharge Training Centre of Teachers For Visually Handicapped, Kadamkuan, Budhmurti, Patna. 7. Anil Gupta S/O Saligam Prasad Gupta R/O Pradeep General Store, Purab Bazar, P.S.-Saharsa, Distt.-Saharsa. …. Respondents. 2. 11.11.2011 Heard leaned counsel for the appellant. Nobody appears for the other side. It is not in disputed that the Diploma Course of Teachers’ Training for visually handicapped is of one year duration and the said period is already over. According to the appellant she should have been admitted in the said course, when she had approached the Training centre on 17th June 2010. According to the In-charge of the Training Centre, Respondent No.6 who has filed a counter affidavit in the writ proceeding, on 17th June 2010, 21 seats out of 2 total 25 seats, were already filled up by other eligible candidates belonging to respective categories, such as, General, EBC, BC and physically handicapped. The four remaining seats were meant for EBC-1 seat and Scheduled Caste–3 seats. Since the appellant belonged to OBC category, she could not be admitted on the said seats reserved for other categories. Now when the duration of diploma course is over and admittedly no seats were vacant, no relief can be granted to the appellant in practical terms. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. Before parting with the matter, we are pained to notice that the admission procedure for the concerned Training Centre which is under the control of Rehabilitation Council of India under the Union of India is not transparent and suffers from apparent shortcomings. The selection procedure must be made transparent and the result must be published well before the beginning of admission procedure so that the selected persons and those who are not selected can act as per law either to take admission or to challenge the selection process, if they are aggrieved. The concerned authorities of the Union of India, particularly the Chairman, 3 Rehabilitation Council of India should take remedial action in the matter without any delay and, in any case, within three months. Jay/ ( Shiva Kirti Singh,J) (Shivaji Pandey, J)