Reasonable accommodation under RPwD Act is mandatory prerequisite for assessing recruitment eligibility of persons with benchmark disabilities, requiring consideration of alternative qualification equivalence to ensure substantive equality.

JUDGMENT :

(Per R.I. Chagla, J.)

1. By this Writ Petition, the Petitioner is impugning the rejection letter dated 22nd August 2024 (Exh.G to the Petition) of the candidature of the Petitioner for the post of Assistant pursuant to advertisement No. RRC – 01/2019 issued by Respondent No. 1 as well as seeking a direction to Respondent No. 2 to consider the candidature of the present Petitioner for the post of Assistant in the establishment of Respondent No. 2 within such time as this Court may deem fit and proper.

2. Further direction is sought to Respondent No. 2 to keep one post vacant for the post of Assistant as per advertisement No. RRC – 01/2019.

3. The Petitioner is a blind person having 75% permanent blindness. The copy of the disability certificate of the Petitioner is annexed at Exh.A to the Petition.

4. The Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are State within the meaning of “State” under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

5. A few relevant facts are set out as under :-

i. On 23rd February 2019 an advertisement No.CEN RRC – 01 / 2019 was published by Respondent No. 1 for various posts under Indian Railways.

ii. The Petitioner pursuant to the advertisement appeared for the examination of class D grade. The Petitioner filled the form for the said post and accordingly, Admit Card was issued to the Petitioner.

iii. The Petitioner downloaded the examination time and date intimation letter from the website of the Respondent No. 2.

iv. The Petitioner appeared for the examination and passed the said examination with gracious marks.

v. The Petitioner received a call letter for the document verification and medical verification. Accordingly, the document verification was carried out by the Respondent No. 2 on 14th February 2024.

vi. On 22nd August 2024, vide the rejection letter, the Respondent No. 2 informed the Petitioner that the Petitioner had been disqualified on the ground that the board from which the Petitioner had passed its matriculation exam was not recognized and the Petitioner was not considered as having done her matriculation. The said rejection letter dated 22nd August 2024 has accordingly been impugned in the present Writ Petition.

6. Dr. Uday Warunjikar, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the State Government Resolution dated 28th February 2007 has given recognition to the Uttama course, which the Petitioner had successfully completed, having equivalence to that of the SSC. He has submitted that in view thereof, the Petitioner is considered to have matriculated.

7. Dr. Warunjikar has referred to the three courses mentioned in the Government Resolution dated 28th February 2007 of the Mumbai Hindi - Vidyapeeth, Mumbai, viz. Uttama, Bhasha Ratna and Sahitya Sudhakar, which is mentioned to have equivalence with SSC, Inter (12th) and B.A. respectively.

8. Dr. Warunjikar has submitted that the Petitioner being a disabled person, viz. having 75% life blindness is in any event to be afforded reasonable accommodation in her eligibility to the post of Group D Level 1 in the Indian Railways.

9. Dr. Warunjikar has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sujata Bora Vs. Coal India Limited & Ors., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 58 wherein the Supreme Court had considered the case of the Appellant, who had appeared for Initial Medical Examination (