Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Criminal Probe Can't Continue Against Unknowns Sans Prima Facie Offence: Bombay HC Quashes CBI FIR
06 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadikari Bids Empathetic Farewell to Kerala High Court
06 Mar 2026
Compensation U/S 28A LA Act Not Restricted to Foundational Award: Bombay High Court
06 Mar 2026
Karnataka HC Issues Notice on Sri Lankan Judge's Right to be Forgotten Plea for Removing Alleged Defamatory Online Content
06 Mar 2026
Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
06 Mar 2026
Shrivastava Highlights Bench-Bar Partnership in Farewell Speech
06 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Directs Urgent Monsoon Prep for Flood-Prone Kochi
06 Mar 2026
Ignoring Court-Mandated PWD Safety Report Invalidates Municipal Order: J&K&L High Court
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
M. M. SATHAYE, NITIN JAMDAR
Shanta Digambar Sonawane – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Through Secretary, Ministry of Railways – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT:
(Nitin Jamdar, J.) :
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The Respondents waive service. Taken up for disposal.
2. This case of a visually impaired candidate illustrates how administrative apathy can defeat the benefits of the legislation enacted to support the persons with disabilities.
3. A Notification 01/2019 was issued by the Respondent- Recruitment Board inviting online registration of applications from suitable candidates on 23 February 2019 for various posts, including the post of Assistant in Level-1 in ‘D’ grade. The Petitioner, being 100 per cent permanently visually impaired, applied for the position of Assistant under the Persons with Benchmark Disabilities category, specifying her disability as visual impairment - blind (B). The Petitioner provided a disability certificate dated 1 January 2019 issued by the Medical Authority, Parbhani, certifying her as 100% permanently visually impaired. To fill out the application form, the Petitioner sought assistance from a person at an Internet cafe. However, during this process, the Petitioner’s date of birth
The central legal point established in the judgment is the obligation to treat persons with disabilities with sensitivity and flexibility in procedures, as mandated by the Rights of Persons with Disa....
The court emphasized that rigid adherence to recruitment rules without considering reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities violates their rights under the RPwD Act.
The interpretation of measurable disability and the eligibility criteria for reservation for persons with disabilities, as defined in the Acts, was central to the judgment.
The court ruled that candidates with disabilities must not be discriminated against based on their degree of disability, ensuring equal treatment in public employment.
The impugned actions of the respondent-RPSC were found to be arbitrary and without valid authority in law, leading to the imposition of a cost on the respondent-RPSC in accordance with the provisions....
The mandatory nature of the provisions of the Persons with Disability Act 1995 and the principles of reasonable accommodation were central to the court's decision.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article