D. P. SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. Pleadings are complete between the parties and learned counsel for the parties agree that the petition may be finally disposed off under the Rules of the Court. 2. This writ petition has been filed claiming a relief of mandamus for a direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Gram Vikas Adhikari under the reserved category of physically handicapped persons, other consequential benefits have also been sought. 3. The District Development Officer, Farrukhabad and Kannauj issued a combined advertisement for both the Districts published in dainik Jagran on 12. 8. 1998 inviting applications for recruitment to 88 posts of Gram Vikas Adhikari. The petitioner, who was fully qualified and eligible applied in pursuance of the advertisement in the general category, claiming reservation as physically handicapped. He appeared for physical tests, which included a mile run, four miles cycling and walking for two miles. Having cleared the physical tests, he appeared for the written examination and after qualifying the same he was called for interview. However, on the publication of final result, his name was not shown in the list of successful candidates. Along with his application he had annexed the disability certificate claiming reservation under the head of "physically -handicap". In spite of approaching the relevant authorities his grievance was not considered forcing him to file this writ petition when an interim order dated 12. 5. 1999 was passed to the effect that if any appointments are made the same would be subject to the final decision of this writ petition. 4. A detailed order was passed by this Court on 27-2-2002 issuing an interim mandamus to appoint the petitioner in the category of physically handicapped person w. e. f. the date when the other candidates were selected or to show cause by filing a reply. A counter-affidavit, though a belated one, was filed in April, 2002, where a stand has been taken that in view of the amended Act, the reservation is only 1% of the vacancy. But, it is not denied that reservation for physically handicapped persons was there. A counter-affidavit, though a belated one, was filed in April, 2002, where a stand has been taken that in view of the amended Act, the reservation is only 1% of the vacancy. But, it is not denied that reservation for physically handicapped persons was there. However, it has been stated in paragraph 25 that the petitioner does not fall within the category of physically handicapped person and, therefore, he is not entitled for reservation either under the U. P. Public Services (Reservation for Physically Handicapped, Dependent of Freedom Fighter and Ex- servicemen) Act, 1993 as Amended in 1997. Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation of Physically Handicapped, Dependents of Freedom Fighters and Ex-Servicemen) Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as U. P. Act No. 4 of 1993) was promulgated for providing reservation in Government service. In this Act No. 4 of 1993 reservation for Physically Handicapped, Dependents of Freedom Fighters and Ex- Servicemen was set at 5% at the stage of direct recruitment. This Act No. 4 of 1993 was drastically amended by the Amending Act No. 6 of 1997 which came into force on 9th July, 1997. By the amended Act, the definition was amended, the relevant amendment are: " (aa) `cerebral palsy means a group of non-progressive conditions of a person characterised by abnormal motor control posture resulting from brain insult or injuries occurring in the pre-natal, peri- natal or infact period of development". Sub-clause (ddd) was also added to mean as follows : " (ddd) `locomotor disability means disability of the bones, joints or muscles leading to substantial restriction of the movement of the limbs or any form of cerebral palsy. " Section 2 (e) was also substituted by the following definition : " (e) `physically handicapped means a person who suffers from : (i) blindness or low vision; (ii) hearing impairment; (iii) locomotor disability or cerebral palsy. " In the principal Act No. 4 of 1993, physically handicapped person was defined as : " (i ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (ii ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (ii ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (iii) who has a physical defect or deformity which causes an interference with the normal functioning of the bones, muscles and joints. " 5. Thus, it would be seen that earlier locomotor disability was confined to physical defect or deformity, but by the Amending Act No. 6 of 1997 in sub-clause (ddd) of Section 2 it has been defined as "disability of the bones, joints or muscles leading to substantial restrictions of the movement of limbs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 6. Thus, it was widened to include any forms of disability which necessarily do not have to be a "defect" or "deformity". 7. Further, by Amendment Act No. 6 of 1997 new Section 3 was substituted. The relevant portion of the new Section 3 is quoted below: "3 (1) There shall be reserved at the stage of direct recruitment, - (i) in public services and post two -per cent of vacancies for dependents of freedom fighters and one per cent of vacancies for ex-servicemen; (ii) in such public services and posts as the State Government may, by notification, identify one per cent of vacancies each for the persons suffering from, - (a) blindness or low vision; (b) hearing impairment; and (c) locomotor disability or cerebral palsy. " 8. The charging Section newly introduced gave 3% reservation to physically handicapped persons. 9. The stand of the respondents that there was only one percent reservation for physically handicapped persons is thus not tenable in view of the Amending Act No. 6 of 1997. In the counter-affidavit, there is absolutely no averment that any other physically handicapped person in any of the three categories had applied except the petitioner. The respondents have also not brought on record the marks obtained by the petitioner and the last person selected in the general category. Out of 88 posts, three per cent posts i. e. 2. 64 posts should have been reserved in favour of physically handicapped persons. The respondents have also not brought on record the marks obtained by the petitioner and the last person selected in the general category. Out of 88 posts, three per cent posts i. e. 2. 64 posts should have been reserved in favour of physically handicapped persons. Applying the principle of rounding up, three posts ought to have been reserved for physically handicapped persons and as such the petitioner was entitled for being appointed under the physically handicapped category. It is not denied that the reservation is horizontal for handicapped candidates, therefore, the petitioner was entitled to be appointed in accordance with the roster at his serial number. It is also noteworthy that the petitioner has annexed a handicapped certificate issued by the competent authority which shows that he suffers from "post traumatic claw hands" and there is 50% disability of the movement of the upper limbs and which is referable to locomotor disability mentioned in Section 3 (i), (ii) (c ). 10. For the reasons given hereinabove, this petition succeeds and is allowed and the respondents are hereby directed to appoint the petitioner to the post of Gram Vikas Adhikari in his category of physically Handicapped persons w. e. f. the date when other candidates were selected in the same selection within a period of four weeks from production of a certified copy of this order. No order as to costs. .