Apex Court Issues Notice In PIL Challenging Exclusion Of Persons With Disabilities From Judicial Appointments; Seeks Response Of All High Courts
The Supreme Court has issued notice in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the exclusion of Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) from appointments as Judges in the district Judiciary.
The Bench, comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud along with Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra sought response of the Central government, all High Courts and State governments.
Senior Advocate Sanjay Parikh represented the Petitioners, two academicians with disabilities.
The plea seeks directions to set right or streamline the existing judicial services rules of different states and High Courts for appointment of Judges to the District/Lower Judiciary under PwD Quota as per the mandate of Section 34, read with 33 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016.
The PIL, filed through AoR Shashank Singh, asserts that the current Judicial services rules violate the fundamental rights of PwDs by failing to comply with the 4 per cent reservation mandate for Persons with Benchmark Disabilities. It also highlights discrepancies in reservation percentages among different states.
"Section 34 read with Section 33 and Schedule 1 of the Act, mandates reservation of not less than 4% of the total vacancies for Persons with Benchmark Disabilities in every government establishment. Surprisingly, the same is being blatantly violated in the appointment of judges to the district/lower judiciary," the plea reads.
The Petition seeks for the establishment of an expert body to review and standardize these rules. Additionally, it calls for the eradication of discriminatory hiring practices inconsistent with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act. Emphasizing the capabilities of individuals with disabilities, the Petition underscores the role of technology in facilitating their participation in judicial tasks. It points out that individuals with visual impairments can effectively perform tasks such as evaluating evidence and making decisions with the aid of software and other assistive devices.
The plea states, "The requirements of the job of a judge are that a person should be able to understand the facts and submissions, discern, evaluate the evidence, and make a decision for which a keen judicial mind is needed and not the physical faculties of sight. Therefore, the Notifications/rules that exclude persons with Benchmark disabilities and do not provide any reservation for them are illegal and arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution and deserve to be set aside to that extent."
"By not identifying the post of a Judge for persons with benchmark disabilities despite the central government identifying the same as being suitable discriminates against such persons by making stereotypical assumptions as to what they are capable of," the plea adds.
"Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ Declaring the exclusion of any Specified/benchmark disability under the RPwD Act by High Courts/ State Governments/ Union Territories which does not align with Section 34 of the RPwD Act is Arbitrary, Discriminatory, illegal, and violative of Section 34/33 of the Act as well as Article 14,16,19 and 21 of the Constitution," the petitioner has prayed for in the petition.
Cause Title: Dr Renga Ramanujam and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. [W.P. (C) No. 000222-2024]
