Equal Opportunity - The Legal Chamber

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Upheld: Supreme Court’s Landmark Judgment on Exam Accessibility

26Feb

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Upheld: Supreme Court’s Landmark Judgment on Exam Accessibility

In this judgment, the Supreme Court affirmed that the constitutional guarantee of equality under Articles 14 and 21, read with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, mandates substantive inclusion, not mere formal equality. The Court directed the UPSC to implement accessible examination processes, including screen reader software and flexible scribe registration, ensuring that rights for persons with disabilities are enforceable realities. Facts Of The Case: The writ petition was instituted by Mission Accessibility, an organization dedicated to advancing the rights of persons with disabilities, seeking enforcement of their rights under the Constitution of India and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The primary grievances pertained to the Civil Services Examin...

Accessibility is a Right, Not a Charity: Supreme Court’s Powerful Ruling on Disability

This Supreme Court judgment establishes a comprehensive monitoring framework, "Project Ability Empowerment," to audit state-run disability care institutions nationwide. It directs compliance with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, emphasizing substantive equality, accessibility, and community living. The Court also mandates a review of reservation policies to include "upward movement" for meritorious disabled candidates. Facts Of The Case: The litigation originates from two consolidated petitions. The first, a 1998 Writ Petition by the Justice Sunanda Bhandare Foundation, sought the enforcement of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, specifically demanding the implementation of reservation for persons with visual disabilities in teaching posts. The second case began a...

Employers Must Accommodate: Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling on Medical Disability & Jobs

This Supreme Court held that a binding Memorandum of Settlement under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which specifically provided alternate employment for colour-blind drivers, created an enforceable statutory obligation on the employer. The subsequent settlement and internal circulars could not override this specific contractual right, and the Corporation's failure to explore redeployment violated principles of natural justice and statutory compliance. Facts Of The Case: The appellant was appointed as a driver by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) in 2014. During a subsequent periodic medical examination, he was found to be colour blind and declared medically unfit to continue in his role as a driver. Following this, the appellant sought alternate employment...