SUJATA BORA v. COAL INDIA LIMITED
Disability Rights: Supreme Court Directs Creation of Supernumerary Post, Emphasizing Reasonable Accommodation and CSR for Persons with Disabilities.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: 2026 INSC 53
Decision Date: 13-01-2026
List of Laws
The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016; Constitution of India; Corporate Social Responsibility; Article 142 of the Constitution of India
- Facts: Coal India Limited (CIL) advertised for Management Trainees in 2019. Sujata Bora, the appellant, applied under the Visually Handicapped (VH) category. She was selected for an interview and called for document verification and a medical examination. She was declared unfit due to visual disability and residuary partial hemiparesis. She possessed certificates indicating 60-70% visual disability, while CIL claimed it was only 30%. The appellant approached the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta.
- Procedural Posture: The appellant initially filed a writ petition (WPA No. 970 of 2023) before the Calcutta High Court, which was partly allowed. CIL appealed to the Division Bench, which set aside the Single Judge's order. The appellant then appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court directed AIIMS to constitute a medical board to assess the appellant's disability.
- Issue: Was the Division Bench justified in setting aside the Single Judge's judgment, which had directed CIL to consider the appellant's candidature from the IME stage? Was the appellant wrongly denied employment due to the notification not providing for "multiple disability"? Is the appellant eligible for appointment under the reserved quota given the AIIMS report indicating 57% disability?
- Holding: Yes, the Division Bench was not justified in setting aside the Single Judge's judgment. The Supreme Court directed the creation of a supernumerary post for the appellant, emphasizing the need for reasonable accommodation and disability inclusion.
- Reasoning: The Supreme Court held that the appellant was wrongly denied employment. The Court emphasized the concept of "reasonable accommodation" as enshrined in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and Article 41 of the Constitution of India. The Court highlighted that disability inclusion is a vital component of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and that companies should view disability inclusion as a strategic advantage. The Court also considered the intersectionality of disability with gender justice, noting the appellant's determination as a single woman with a disability. The Court exercised its power under Article 142 of the Constitution to ensure complete justice.
🔒 For Members Only