SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Ker) 771

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANU SIVARAMAN, C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, JJ.
Shibli K – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
WA No.1435 of 2023
Decided on : 15-11-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : BONNY BENNY
For the Respondent: SRI S.MANU(DSGI)(B/O), SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL-SR.GP, SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN

Point of Law: Section 3 of RPWD Act directs appropriate government to ensure that persons with disabilities enjoy right to equality, life with dignity and respect for his or her integrity equally with others.

Headnote:

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - Section 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 – Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 320(1) - Examination - Persons with disabilities - No extra time was allotted - Grievances raised by him in writ petition is that no extra time was allotted to persons with disabilities in objective examination conducted by Kerala Public Service Commission – Purpose for which assistance of a scribe is given to a PwD candidate is to help them in understanding questions and to mark or write down answers as per directions of candidates. (Para 24)

Finding of the Court :

Conduct of fifth respondent in declining prayer of appellant to chose his own scribe and providing a scribe from panel prepared by them cannot be said to be arbitrary or unreasonable - In order to ensure quality of scribe provided, in impugned judgment learned Single Judge has given a direction to 5th respondent to provide opportunity to candidates with visual disability above 40% to interact with scribe provided by Commission at least two days in advance - If, after such interaction, candidate finds scribe to be unsuitable, fifth respondent shall provide assistance of another scribe from panel of scribes prepared for that particular examination – Court is of considered view that scribe provided to candidates belonging to PwD candidates from a panel prepared by KPSC will serve requirements of RPwD Act – Court do not find any illegality or irregularity in impugned judgment of learned Single Judge so as to call for any interference.

Result: Writ appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

C.Pratheep Kumar, J.

This writ appeal has been preferred by the petitioner in the writ petition W.P.(C).No.3947 of 2021 against the judgment dated 25.07.2022 of the learned Single Judge. The appellant is a visually challenged person having 100% disability as declared by the Medical Board. In spite of the disabilities, he had acquired post graduation in MBA and M.Com in Business Operations, qualified NET (National Eligibility Test) with JRF in Management and Commerce Streams and pursuing Ph.D in Management and Commerce Streams. He had also published papers and book chapters. He has valuable industry experience as a Project Consultant and served as a Visiting faculty member at the esteemed MCA Department of Kannur University.

2. He had filed the writ petition in the light of the experience during the Kerala Administrative Examination (KAS), where he encountered some difficulties with the scribe provided to him. Two main grievances were raised by him in the writ petition; one is that no extra time was allotted to persons with disabilities (In short, PwD candidates) in objective examination conducted by the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC), for the post of Assistant Professor in Business Administration. The second grievance is that adequate assistance was not received from the scribe appointed, during the examination. During the pendency of the writ petition, the examination for the post of Assistant Professor was conducted on 6.4.2021 and as such, the writ petition became infructuous. Even then, the learned Single Judge proceeded to dispose of the writ petition on merits, as the decision on the point noted by the appellant will be of general benefit to PwD candidates. By that time, the KPSC has decided to give extra time for objective examination for candidates with visual disability and as such, that part of the grievance also no more exists. In the examination, the appellant was provided the service of a scribe from a panel prepared by the KPSC. The appellant is not satisfied with the assistance given by the scribe appointed by the KPSC and his demand is that a PwD candidate is to be given full freedom to bring his own scribe, for all competitive examinations.

3. After evaluating the rival contentions raised by both sides and discussing various decisions and the law on the point, the learned Single Judge had disposed of the writ petition holding that the fifth respondent (KPSC) shall provide opportunity to candidates with visual disability above 40% to interact with the scribe provided by the Commission at least two days in advance. If, after such interaction, the candidate finds the scribe to be unsuitable, the fifth respondent shall provide the assistance of another scribe from the panel of scribes prepared for the particular examination.

4. Dissatisfied with the above judgment of the learned Single Judge, the appellant preferred this appeal raising various grounds. According to the appellant, in the light of the provisions in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (In short, RPwD Act), and various Circulars issued by the Government of India, PwD candidates are to be given discretion to bring his own scribe. Now the points that arise for consideration are the following :-

    (i) Whether the PwD candidates are entitled to bring a scribe of their own choice, while attending competitive examinations conducted by KPSC ?.

(ii) Whether the service of a scribe provided from a panel prepared by the KPSC to such candidates will serve the requirement of Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act, 2016?

5. Heard all the parties.

6. From the Preamble of RPwD Act, it can be seen that the Parliament enacted the above law mainly to give effect to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The above Convention adopted on 13.12.2006, lays down the following principles for empowerment of persons with disabilities :-

    (a) respect for inherent dignity, individual autonomy including the freedom to make

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          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

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
          whatsapp-icon Back to top