- Case
- IN RE RECRUITMENT OF VISUALLY IMPAIRED IN JUDICIAL SERVICES v. THE REGISTRAR GENERAL THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (Supreme Court of India, 03-03-2025)
- Law
- Constitution of India, Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act.
The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act, 2016): The judgment extensively discusses the RPwD Act, 2016, emphasizing its role in operationalizing the constitutional promise of full and equal citizenship for disabled individuals. Section 3(3) prohibits discrimination on the ground of disability, while Section 20 specifically prohibits discrimination in public employment. Section 34 mandates reservation of not less than 4% of total vacancies for persons with benchmark disabilities. The judgment also refers to Section 32 (erstwhile PwD Act, 1995), corresponding to Section 33 of the RPwD Act 2016, requiring the State to identify posts reservable for PwDs. The second proviso to Section 34 is discussed in relation to exemptions granted by the State Government. The judgment also mentions Rule 12 of the Madhya Pradesh Rights of Persons with Disability Rules, 2017, regarding the increase in reservation for PwD. The judgment also discusses the importance of reasonable accommodation as recognized and specifically provided for in the RPwD Act, 2016. The judgment also refers to Section 3(2)(3), and (5) of the RPwD Act as being violated when reasonable accommodation is not provided. The judgment also refers to Section 34 (2) of the RPwD Act, 2016. The judgment also refers to Section 34 of the RPwD Act, 2016, and Clause 11 of DoPT Circular dated 15.01.2018.
Constitution of India, 1949: The judgment refers to Articles 14, 15, 16, 19, 21, 41, 309, 335 of the Constitution of India. It discusses the principle of inclusivity and equality under Articles 14, 15, and 16. It notes the absence of 'disability' as a specific ground for non-discrimination in Article 15, advocating for a constitutional amendment. The judgment emphasizes the right to live with dignity under Article 21. It mentions Article 32 in the context of converting a letter petition. Article 41 is discussed in relation to the State's duty to make effective provisions for public assistance to disabled persons. Article 309 is mentioned in relation to the government's power to relax rules. Article 335 is mentioned in relation to the maintenance of efficiency of administration. The judgment also refers to the 73rd and 74th Amendments of the Constitution of India. The judgment also refers to Articles 5(3) and 2 of UNCRPD. The judgment also refers to Articles 14 and 16(1) read with Section 3 of the RPwD Act 2016.
Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994: The judgment challenges the legality of these rules, specifically Rule 6A, which excludes visually impaired and low vision candidates from appointment. The amendment to Rule 7, prescribing eligibility criteria, is also challenged. The judgment discusses the amendment made in Rule 6A of Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994. The judgment also discusses the proviso to Rule 7 of the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994. The judgment also refers to Rule 7 of the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 1994, to the extent it prescribes the additional requirement of either a three-year practice period or securing an aggregate score of 70% in the first attempt.
Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010: The judgment discusses Rule 10 of the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010, regarding reservation for PwD candidates. It also mentions the amendment to these rules providing relaxation in age and a concession of 5% in marks for persons with benchmark disabilities' candidates. The judgment also refers to Rule 36 of the Rajasthan Employment of Disabled Persons Rules, 2000.
General Principles of Law: The judgment extensively discusses the principle of reasonable accommodation, emphasizing it as a fundamental right integral to achieving substantive equality for PwD. It also delves into the concept of indirect discrimination, highlighting how facially neutral criteria can have discriminatory effects. The judgment also discusses the principle of equality and non-discrimination. The judgment also discusses the principle of affirmative action. The judgment also discusses the principle of legitimate expectation.
International Law: The judgment refers to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), 2007, emphasizing India's obligations as a signatory. It extracts several provisions from the convention, including those related to equality, non-discrimination, accessibility, and access to justice. The judgment also refers to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 (VCLT). The judgment also refers to International Principles and Guidelines on Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities 2019.
