1 / 4 2025:CGHC:22324 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3839 of 2025 Vaibhav Singh S/o Shri Jitendra Kumar Singh Aged About 28 Years R/o Thakur Para, Kawardha, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, General Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur (C.G.). 2. Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Through Its Secretary, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.). --- Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Anup Majumdar, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Sanjeev Pandey, GA. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Narendra Kumar Vyas, Judge Judgment on Board 22.05.2025 1. The petitioner, who is a physically handicap by birth has filed the present petition claiming the relief that he be classified as physically disabled person under the category of OL (One Leg) rather than OAL (One Arm and Leg) for the recruitment process conducted by the Public Service Commission in the year 2024. 2 / 4 The Petitioner also prayed that respondent No.2/PSC be directed to decide his pending representation. 2. From the facts and records, it is reflected that the petitioner has participated in various examination for obtaining employment in the State of Chhattisgarh. It is a case of the petitioner that from the very beginning, petitioner was granted the disability certificate as he is suffering from ‘Hemiparesis, Limb Length Discrepancy >2.5cm’, Annexure P-2 dated 09.10.2024. 3. Petitioner submitted his application for the recruitment process conducted by the Public Service Commission under OL Category. Petitioner being applied for the person with disability claiming under the category of OL and he has also cleared preliminary examination conducted by the PSC in the year 2024. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that earlier the petitioner has applied for the post of ‘Rural Agricultural Extension Officer’ in OL cateogry wherein candidature has been declined on the count that he falls within the ambit of OAL, therefore, he is apprehending that his candidature may again be declined by the PSC on the same ground, hence, he approached this Court for clarifying himself to which category he falls whether OL or OAL. He lastly contended that last date of submission of form is 05th June 2025, therefore, his category be clarified for the purposes of participation in recruitment process. 3 / 4 5. This Court directed Dr. Keshav Dhruv (Civil Surgeon), District Hospital Kabirdham to appear before this Court. He is connected through virtual mode and he would submit that petitioner is suffering from ‘Hemiparesis, Limb Length Discrepancy, and his one upper limb is weak, therefore, he falls within the category of the OAL (One Arm and Leg). 6. This Court to ascertain the disability suffered by the petitioner has called for the records from the office of the Dr. Keshav Dhruv (Surgeon), District Hospital, Kabirdham. 7. From bare perusal of the said document/records, it is quite vivid that in the Disability Certificate Form-2 singed by the authorized Medical Officer dated 04.10.2024 the disability of the petitioner has been shown as ‘ Locomotor Disability’ and diagnosed as the petitioner is suffering from ‘Hemiparesis with Limb Length Discrepancy>5cm LT Lower Limb shorting with Equinn and Stiff Ankle LT with weaker in LT Lower Limb 45% disability, and declared as petitioner suffers from disability to the extent of 45% permanent disability in relation to Left Lower Limb as per the Guidelines for the purpose of assessing the extent of specified disability. Since, 40% of the disability is the minimum bench mark for getting permanent disability certificate and no such disability to the extent of 40% has been shown in the upper limb, it is clarified that the petitioner will fall within the OL category only. 4 / 4 8. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled to be classified as OL category for all the purposes. 9. In the result, the present writ petition is disposed of with the above observation/directions. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge J/-