the Commission as unsuitable on the ground that he was unable to move without help and he cannot read or write and the Bench noted that these are inabilities of any blind person and undoubtedly, these disabilities arose out of 90% blindness of the candidate concerned and that in a case of the person, who is 90% blind, was considered for appointment, to a post identified and suitable for physically disabled candidates under Sec.32 and which is reserved for such disabled persons as per Sec.33 of the Central Act, then, the impugned action of the selecting authority in further assessing the suitability for such posts, etc., is clearly wrong, ultravires, etc. The Division Bench of this Court also noted that as per the mandatory provisions in the Central Act, 1995, any person, who suffers from the enumerated disability level of 40% or above, is eligible to be considered for appointment on the basis of reservation for such special category and that neither the Central Act nor the Rules framed thereunder lays down any maximum limit for such physical disability for such appointment and that therefore a candidate who is suffering from physical disability of requisite nature of the level of 40% above will be eligible and suitable for appointment even if the disability is of a large extent so long as the post has been identified as suitable for such physically disabled category in terms of
