THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR W.P.No.957 of 2011 ORDER(Per Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) The first respondent, who applied for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher under Visually Handicapped Category in pursuance of DSC-2006 Notification, was selected and was subjected to medical examination, but the petitioners did not consider his claim for appointment. He states that as the name of one Chenakrishna Reddy was eliminated from the selection list on account of producing a bogus certificate, he is entitled to be appointed for the said post. Hence, the first respondent filed O.A.No.8026 of 2009 seeking to declare the action of the petitioners in not appointing him as Secondary Grade Teacher though he got 7th rank after elimination of bogus certificate holder, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the petitioners to appoint him for the said post with all consequential benefits. During the pendency of the said O.A., the third petitioner informed the first respondent through proceedings dated 25.09.2009, that he is not entitled for appointment as per the merit list prepared since there is no waiting list in DSC-2006 as per G.O.Ms.No.44, dated 06.05.2006. Through order dated 22.12.2009, the Tribunal allowed the said O.A. setting aside the said proceedings and directed the petitioners to consider the claim of the first respondent for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher under Physically Handicapped Category as he is below the said Chenakrishna Reddy, in the merit list of Secondary Grade Teachers. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. 2. The first respondent filed counter stating that after elimination of Sri A. Chenakrishna Reddy, who produced bogus certificate, he is the next immediate meritorious eligible candidate under PH-VH category and as such, he is entitled to be appointed for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher. It is also stated that the right of a qualified and eligible candidate for selection and appointment cannot be deprived. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned counsel for the first respondent. 4. When the matter came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Services-I produced a letter dated 21.06.2011, stating that one post under PH-VH (General) was not filled up in DSC 2006 on the ground of exclusion of one A. Chenakrishna Reddy from the selection list and that 567 SGT posts in MP/Government schools were notified in subsequent DSC-2008 duly excluding the said unfilled vacancy of DSC-2006 and out of which 562 candidates were selected and 303 candidates were appointed in the available vacancies and remaining 259 candidates in DSC- 2008 are still waiting for want of clear vacancies. He contended that as there is no waiting list in DSC-2006, the first respondent is not entitled for appointment against the vacancy arisen due to elimination of said Chenakrishna Reddy. 5. It is not in dispute that the first respondent has attended the written test for the post of SGT in DSC-2006 under PH-VH General Category and secured 63.50 marks and he was subjected to medical examination. As per the merit list of DSC-2006, seven candidates were selected, out of which the name of one Sri A. Chenakrishna Reddy was eliminated as he is having only 30% of blindness, which is not sufficient as per G.O.Ms.No.27, dated 09.08.2000 for appointment and produced a bogus certificate. As such, the petitioners have mistakenly allowed said Chenakrishna Reddy to appear for the said post under Physically Handicapped Category. Since the vacancy arisen in view of the mistake of the petitioners and in view of the fact that the said post remained unfilled as per the letter dated 21.06.2011, produced by the learned Government Pleader, the next immediate meritorious candidate in the merit list i.e., the first respondent is entitled for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher even though there is no waiting list in DSC-2006. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order impugned. However, if the first respondent has got 40% of disability, he can claim for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher under Physically Handicapped Category-Visually Handicapped Category. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _______________ K.G.SHANKAR, J Date:21.06.2011 sj