NEW DELHI: In a landmark verdict aimed at protecting rights of differently-abled persons and making the judiciary more accommodative and inclusive, SC Monday ruled that visually impaired persons cannot be barred from becoming judges and quashed a MP law that prohibited such persons from appearing in judicial exams. It stated that disability is no barrier to excelling in the legal profession.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan held that clinical assessment of disability by medical experts cannot be the basis to deny benefits under Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act and reasonable accommodation must be provided to them as a prerequisite to assessing their eligibility.
“Visually impaired candidates cannot be said to be ‘not suitable’ for judicial service and they are eligible to participate in selection for posts in judicial service. The amendment made in Rule 6A of Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 falls foul of the Constitution, and is hence, struck down to the extent that it does not include visually impaired persons who are educationally qualified for the post to apply,” Justice Mahadevan, who penned the verdict, said.
Quoting Louis Braille who was himself blind and invented ‘Braille’, Justice Mahadevan said what the visually impaired needed was not pity or sympathy but accommodation and directed that a separate cut-off was to be maintained for visually-impaired candidates. Highlighting that Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act was not being implemented in judiciary with as many as 11 HCs – Jammu and Kashmir, Calcutta, Jharkhand, Sikkim, Uttarakhand, Manipur, Meghalaya, Allahabad, Karnataka, Bombay and Tripura – do not provide for any reservation or concession to PwDs in the recruitment of judges.
Pointing out contributions made by various jurists in India who are differently abled, the SC said they have “demonstrated that visual impairment was no barrier to attaining professional excellence, competing on equal footing, and making significant contributions to the justice delivery system alongside their able-bodied counterparts”.