The Supreme Court has called upon the Uttarakhand Government, its Public Service Commission, and the Registrar General of the Uttarakhand High Court to respond to a petition challenging the exclusion of candidates with blindness and locomotor disabilities from eligibility for the state's judicial services examination.
A Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan issued fresh notices after noting the absence of representation despite earlier directions, especially in light of the upcoming exam scheduled for August 31.
The petition, filed by Sravya Sindhuri, a candidate with complete visual impairment—alleges that the recruitment notification issued on May 16 unlawfully bars individuals with certain benchmark disabilities from applying, in violation of constitutional guarantees and statutory rights under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act).
Expressing disapproval, Justice Pardiwala remarked, "That is very bad, very bad on the part of the government,” while taking note of the exclusionary policy.
The petition contends that the notification restricts eligibility under the Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD) quota to only four categories: individuals cured of leprosy, victims of acid attacks, those with muscular dystrophy, and persons with dwarfism, effectively sidelining other recognized disabilities, including blindness and locomotor disability.
Further, the petitioner challenged the imposition of a domicile requirement, arguing that it unjustly bars non-residents of Uttarakhand who have benchmark disabilities from participating in the recruitment process. The petition claims this condition is arbitrary and discriminatory, particularly when read with Section 34 of the RPwD Act, which mandates a 4% horizontal reservation in public employment for persons with benchmark disabilities, including 1% each for blindness and locomotor disabilities.
This development comes in the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling delivered on March 3, wherein it invalidated similar exclusionary provisions in the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules. In that ruling, the Court held that denying blind candidates access to judicial service amounts to impermissible discrimination and recognized the right against disability-based exclusion as equivalent in importance to a fundamental right.
The current plea urges the Court to strike down the impugned advertisement to the extent it excludes non-domiciled PwBD candidates and narrows eligibility to only a few sub-categories, contrary to statutory and constitutional mandates.
The matter is expected to be heard further once the responses from the concerned authorities are filed.
Picture Source :
