
VIKASH
KUMAR
VERSUS
UNION
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS.
Civil
Appeal No. 273 of 2021, Decided on 11.02.2021
JUDGES:
Dr. Dhananjaya Y
Chandrachud, Indira Banjeree, Sanjiv Khanna, JJ.
Facts:
In the present case, an
appeal was filed by Vikash Kumar, a UPSC candidate who was denied a scribe in
the civil services’ examination. The appellant has a disability in the form of
dysgraphia, commonly known as a Writer’s cramp. His request for scribe was rejected
by the UPSC on the ground that a scribe could only be provided to blind
candidates and candidates with locomotor disability or cerebral palsy with an
impairment of at least 40% and the appellant did not meet this criterion. The
Central Administrative Tribunal and the Delhi High Court dismissed his
challenge against the rejection by UPSC. Hence, he filed the present appeal.
ISSUE
Whether the petitioner
suffering from Benchmark Disability is entitled to scribe in Civil Services
Examination?
Held:
The Supreme Court
allowed the appeal and held that the appellant would be entitled to the
facility of a scribe for appearing at the Civil Services Examination and any
other competitive selection conducted under the authority of the government.
The Court ruled that a
person suffering from the neurological condition of Writer’s Cramp is entitled
to have a scribe to write the Civil Service Exam. The bench held that the
facility of scribe can be provided for persons with disabilities including
those having benchmark disabilities. “The
appellant has a chronic neurological condition which is in Schedule 4 of the
2016 Act. We, therefore hold that the appellant is entitled to a scribe.”
The Court directed the
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to frame proper guidelines which
would regulate and facilitate the grant of a facility of a scribe to persons
with disability within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities Act, 2016 within three months of the order.
[In Section 2(s) of the
2016 Act, the concept of Persons with disabilities is embodied. Section 2(s)
has been phrased by Parliament in broad terms so as to mean a person with a
long term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairment which in
interaction with various barriers hinders full and effective participation in
society equally with others.This section is a far reaching recognition by the
legislature of disability as not only a function of a physical or mental impairment
but of its interaction with barriers
resulting in a social milieu which prevents the realization of full, effective
an equal participation in society. So, the definition of benchmark disability
under Section 2(r) cannot be conflated with the notion of disability under
Section 2(s).]
The bench observed, “To confine the facility of a scribe only
to those who have benchmark disabilities would be to deprive a class of persons
of their statutorily recognised entitlements.” The possibility of misuse
cannot be used to deprive equal access to persons with disability from seeking the facility of a scribe.