Patna High Court
Shashi Bhushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The petitioner did not meet the 40 % disability threshold prescribed under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and therefore the selection was proper; the writ petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, a physically handicapped candidate, applied for the post of Junior Engineer under the 40 % disability reservation in the Bihar Technical Service Commission’s 2019 recruitment. He claimed a 42 % disability as per his certificate, but the Commission’s medical board assessed his disability at 15 % and later at IGIMS, concluding he did not meet the 40 % threshold. Consequently, he was not placed in the OH category and his total marks (52.1039) fell short of the cut‑off (58.7667) for the reserved category. The petitioner filed a writ seeking quashing of two selection letters and direction to be appointed under the disability quota. The High Court examined the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and held that the petitioner did not satisfy the statutory disability benchmark, so the selection process was lawful. Finding no ground for interference, the Court dismissed the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner satisfies the 40 % disability requirement under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 for reservation in the OH category.
- Whether the letters issued by the Bihar Technical Service Commission can be quashed and the petitioner be directed to be appointed under the disability quota.
- Whether the court can intervene in the selection process of a state recruitment under the statutory framework.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- disability reservation
- OH category
- Junior Engineer recruitment
- Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016
- medical board assessment
- writ petition
- selection process
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8636 of 2025
======================================================
Shashi Bhushan Kumar son of Kishori Prasad Yazad, Resident of Village-
Gongri Par, P.O.- Hargawan, P.S.- Manpur, District- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through the Principal Secretary, General Administration
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government
of Bihar, Patna
3. The Bihar Technical Service Commission, Through its Secretary, Bihar,
Patna.
4. The Secretary, Bihar Technical Service Commission, Bihar, Patna
5. The In-Charge Secretary, Bihar Technical Service Commission, Patna.
6. The Deputy Secretary, Bihar Technical Service Commission, Bihar, Patna,
7. Shashi Kumar, Son of Soharai Mahto, Having Registration No.
BR00150010058321 selected under Backward Class (BC) Category
Physically Handicapped (OH) for the post of Junior Engineer against the
Advertisement No. 01 of 2019 under 40 percent BH Category.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Karandeep Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha, GA-8
For B.T.S.C. : Mr. Nikesh Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Mukund Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 27-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,
learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel
appearing for the Bihar Technical Service Commission.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8636 of 2025(2) dt.27-04-2026
2/4
2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for
the following relief/s :-
“For quashing the letter as contained
in Letter No.-3896 dated 20.12.2024 so far affect
the right of the petitioner issued under the
signature of the In-charge Secretary, Bihar
Technical Service Commission, Patna whereby
and where under the final selection list in regard
to selection of candidates for appointment to the
post of Junior Engineer in different Departments
of the state of Bihar pursuant to the Advertisement
bearing Advertisement No.- 01 of 2019 has been
published in which the petitioner has not been
selected in the category of reservation of physical
handicapped.
(ii) Also for quashing the letter as
contained in Letter No. 549 dated 11.02.2025 so
far affect the right of the petitioner, issued under
the signature of the In-charge Secretary, Bihar
Technical Service Commission, Patna whereby
and where under further 30 candidates has been
recommended for selection to the post of Junior
Engineer against Advertisement No. 01 of 2019 in
which the name of the petitioner has not been
figured.
(iii) Also for directing the authorities to
select the petitioner on the post of Junior Engineer
(Civil) against the Advertisement No. 01 of 2019
in reserved category of Disability Quota.
(iv) Also for directing the respondent to
declare fresh result of the candidate by selecting
the petitioner on the post of Junior Engineer
(Civil) against the Advertisement No. 01 of 2019
under the persons with disability quota which is
remain vacant post.
(v) And for grant of any other relief (s)
for which petitioner is found to be entitled in view
of the facts and circumstances of this case.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.8636 of 2025(2) dt.27-04-2026
3/4
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the sole ground on which his case was rejected is
that, as per the certificate, he was assessed to have 42%
permanent physical disability; however, this aspect has been
completely ignored by the respondents.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the Bihar Technical
Service Commission, on the other hand, submits that prior to the
publication of the final result, and in order to prevent any fraud,
the disability of all differently-abled candidates was examined
by a Medical Board constituted by the Commission. The
petitioner appeared before the said Medical Board, which
assessed his disability at 15%. It is only on this basis that the
respondent did not accept the disability certificate issued by the
Civil Surgeon, Nalanda.
5. After hearing the parties and upon perusal of the
statutory provisions under the Right of Persons with Disabilities
Act, 2016, this Court finds that the Commission conducted a
medical examination twice firstly by Medical Board and
thereafter at IGIMS, Patna, wherein the petitioner did not meet
the benchmark disability of 40%. Consequently, he was not
considered under the OH category. It further appears that the
petitioner secured a total of 52.1039 marks, whereas the cut-off
Patna High Court CWJC No.8636 of 2025(2) dt.27-04-2026
4/4
marks for the unreserved category under Junior Engineer (Civil)
(40% OH category) was 58.7667. As such, the petitioner was
not recommended for selection.
6. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court finds no
ground to interfere in the present writ petition.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands
dismissed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
U
Checking your session…