Back
Supreme Court Mandates PwBD Appointments: No More Hiding Behind Outdated Lists
In a landmark ruling on , the , through Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, directed the and to appoint two candidates with —Sudhanshu Kardam (specific learning disability) and Amit Yadav (mental illness)—to suitable Group 'C' posts. The bench overturned lower court decisions that relied on pre-2021 post identifications, emphasizing the supremacy of the latest Gazette Notification under the . This decision, cited as reinforces inclusive employment for persons with (PwBD).
The Rejection That Sparked a Battle
The saga began with SSC's Combined Graduate Level Examination (CGLE) 2018, aimed at filling Group 'B' and 'C' posts, including two 'Auditor' vacancies (Post Code D33) under the 'Other PwD' category in CAG's office. Both Kardam and Yadav cleared all tiers, got recommended, but faced rejection in . CAG returned their dossiers, deeming the Auditor post unsuitable for mental illness or specific learning disability based on a 2013 list.
Yadav approached the , which in ordered a medical fitness test. The quashed this in , restoring the rejection. Kardam, facing similar fate in his pending CAT case, intervened and appealed to the Supreme Court. As reported in legal circles, this highlighted a broader issue: government bodies clinging to obsolete notifications despite RPwD Act reforms.
Duelling Claims: Disabilities vs. Departmental Lists
Appellants' Arsenal : Kardam and Yadav argued reliance on the , Gazette Notification by the 's . This superseded the 2013 list (from the repealed 1995 Act), identifying Group 'C' posts like Assistant (Audit) and Auditor-II as suitable for mental illness, specific learning disability, autism, and more—per . They asserted arbitrary rejection violated their benchmark disability rights (40%+ assessed).
CAG and SSC's Defence : Initially, CAG maintained pre-2021 identifications excluded these disabilities for Auditor roles. They cited an internal 2018 Expert Committee under RPwD Act and a revised SSC result in 2022 reallocating candidates. However, during Supreme Court hearings, CAG filed an additional affidavit on , conceding the 2021 notification's validity and willingness to appoint to suitable posts— provided SSC recommended and sent dossiers .
No precedents were directly cited, but the Court dissected the Gazette's evolution: from 1995 Act's 3% reservation (three categories) to RPwD's expanded 4% for 21 disabilities, with expert committees reviewing suitability.
Gazette Gamble Pays Off: Court's Sharp Reasoning
The Court zeroed in on the 2021 notification's explicit supersession clause, criticizing reliance on the 2013 list. It noted CAG's own affidavit shift post-hearing (after ASG sought time on ), confirming Group 'C' suitability. Legally, Sections 33 (post identification) and 34 (reservation) of RPwD Act bind authorities to the latest expert-backed lists. The bench clarified: rejections based on outdated frameworks are untenable, upholding CAT's intent while redirecting to appropriate posts.
This aligns with RPwD's push for inclusivity, distinguishing (e.g., 55% mental illness for Yadav, 40%+ SLD for Kardam) from earlier narrow categories.
Key Observations
"... this Court was satisfied that the appellant herein could be considered for appointment in the appropriate category in light of the Gazette Notification dated 4th January, 2021 issued by the."(Para 17)
"Now, there remains no impediment whatsoever for accommodating the appellant... against Group ‘C’ posts which have been identified as suitable to their disabilities."(Para 19)
"The respondent No.2-SSC is directed to forthwith... forward the dossiers... Upon the dossiers being received... shall be duly considered for appointment against Group ‘C’ posts... createfor accommodating both these candidates."(Para 21)
"The said list supersedes the list of posts... notified through notification No. 16-15/2010-DD-III dated."(Quoted Gazette, Para 10)
Victory with Strings: Dossiers, Deadlines, and Duty
The appeal was disposed with clear directives: - SSC to send dossiers within two weeks. - CAG to appoint to suitable Group 'C' posts per affidavit. - if 2018 vacancies filled. - Effect from joining date.
Practically, this ensures backdoor entry for deserving PwBD candidates, sets precedent against "outdated" excuses, and pressures departments to update lists. For future SSC/CGLE recruits, it mandates real-time alignment with DEPwD notifications—potentially unlocking hundreds of opportunities in audit and beyond.
As one legal observer noted, this isn't just about two auditors; it's a blueprint for RPwD compliance in government hiring.
