In an important judgment, the Supreme Court on Monday held that visually impaired candidates are eligible to participate in selection for the posts under the judicial service, stating that a rights-based approach necessitates that the persons with disabilities (PwD) must not face any discrimination in their pursuit of judicial service opportunities, and there must be affirmative action on behalf of the State to provide an inclusive framework.

“Visually impaired candidates cannot be said to be ‘not suitable’ for judicial service and they are eligible to participate in selection for posts in judicial service,” the Supreme Court ruled today, further starting that “For the purpose of rights and entitlements of persons with disabilities, particularly in employment, and more specifically in respect of the issues covered in this judgment, there can be no distinction between Persons with Disabilities (PwD) and Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD).”

Advertisement

Striking down section Rule 6A of the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 insofar as it excludes visually impaired and low vision candidates for appointment in judicial service, a bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan said, “Now, it is high time that we view the right against disability-based discrimination, as recognized in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act, 2016) of the same stature as a fundamental right, thereby ensuring that no candidate is denied consideration solely on account of their disability.”

Stating that We have treated it as the most important case and touched upon constitutional framework also and institutional disability jurisprudence, Justice Mahadevan authoring the judgment said, “… the principle of reasonable accommodation, as enshrined in international conventions, established jurisprudence, and the RPwD Act, 2016, mandate that accommodations be provided to PwDs as a prerequisite to assessing their eligibility.”

Justice Mahadevan further said, “…any indirect discrimination that results in the exclusion of PwDs, whether through rigid cut-offs or procedural barriers, must be interfered with in order to uphold substantive equality. The commitment to ensuring equal opportunity necessitates a structured and inclusive approach, where merit is evaluated with due regard to the reasonable accommodations required, thereby fostering judicial appointments that truly reflects the principles of fairness and justice.”

Having said this, the top court struck down the Rule 7 of the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994, in respect of PwD candidates to the extent prescribing additional requirement of either a three-year practice period or securing an aggregate score of 70 per cent in the first attempt.

However, the judgment said that the rule 7 of the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994, will be applicable to the PwD candidates insofar as it prescribes the educational and other qualifications as eligibility criteria including the minimum aggregate score of 70 per cent (with relaxation as may be determined like in the case of SC/ST candidates), but without the requirement of either that it should be in the first attempt or that they should have three years’ practice.

The top court further said that relaxation can be done in assessing suitability of candidates when enough PwD are not available after selection in their respective category, to the extent as stated in the relevant paragraphs above, and in the light of existing rules and Official Circulars and executive orders in this regard, as in the present case.

The court further said that a separate cut-off is to be maintained and selection made accordingly for visually-impaired candidates as has been indicated in the relevant paragraphs in line with the judgment in Indra Sawhney.

Striking down Rule 6A and 7 (to a limited extent), the top court set aside the April 1, 2024, Madhya Pradesh High order and the Court and the consequential notification issued by the High Court on November 17, 2023. The PwD candidates and the appellant – Ayush Yardi and similarly placed persons, are entitled to be considered for participating in the selection process in the light of today’s judgment by the top court.

The judgment further directed that the respective authorities proceed with the selection process for appointment of the judicial officers, and complete the same, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three months, from today.