Dear All
I'm attaching the interim direction given by the Delhi High Court
yesterday in matters of Sambhavana v. UPSC. All examinees are
requested to carry the order to the Exams Centres to withstand
harassment. Great Job done by learned Council Mr Pankaj Sinha in Delhi
and Madam Kanchan Panmani in Mumbai.  But battle is not yet over. I
hope lawyers in the field continue working in unison to carry the
battle of disability rights in the Courts in the future also. Below
relevant sections are pasted for quick perusal...

9.      So far as the petitioner's prayer to stay the Preliminary
Examination scheduled to be held on 24.08.2014 is concerned, prima
facie it appears to us that reservation of only two vacancies for
visually impaired candidates out of 26 vacancies reserved for
physically handicapped category is not based on proper assessment of
the vacancies available in all the Services participating in the
examination.

 10.    We have also taken note of the fact that in the counter affidavit
filed on behalf of Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pension,
it is stated that the said Ministry is a Cadre Controlling Authority
only for IAS and that out of 180 vacancies sought to be filled up in
IAS on the basis of Civil Services Examination - 2014, six vacancies
are reserved for candidates belonging to physically handicapped
category, i.e., 2 each for visually impaired, hearing impaired and
locomotor disability. Thus, for IAS itself two vacancies are reserved
for visually impaired. What is the vacancy position in the other 19
Services that are identified suitable for physically disabled category
is not known. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of UPSC is silent
on this aspect and no particulars have been furnished about the number
of vacancies furnished by the other Cadre Controlling Authorities.
Under these circumstances, prima facie we find substance in the
contention of the writ petitioner that the reservation for visually
impaired candidates is not in conformity with Section 33 of the
Disabilities Act, 1995. However, we are not inclined to stay the
Preliminary Examination on that ground.

 11.    It is to be noticed that the UPSC in its counter affidavit has
categorically stated that whatever figures that have been shown in the
impugned Notice are only a tentative indication. In fact it is
specifically mentioned in the impugned Notice itself that the final
number of vacancies may undergo change after getting firm number of
vacancies from Cadre Controlling Authorities. Therefore, we deem it
appropriate to allow UPSC to proceed with the Preliminary Examination
as per the schedule making it clear that the UPSC shall ensure proper
assessment of actual number of vacancies reserved for visually
impaired candidates before conducting the Main Examination.

12.     Coming to the other interim relief sought, i.e., provision of 20
minutes per hour additional time to the Visually Impaired candidates,
the learned counsel for the UPSC has placed before this Court a set of
Rules issued by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pension
by Notification dated 31.05.2014. It is contended by the learned
counsel that the said Rules are meant for following the uniform
procedure while conducting the competitive examinations by the UPSC in
2014 in 23 services specified therein and UPSC is bound to follow the
said Rules.

 13.    Section II (A)(iv) of the said Rules which deals with Preliminary
Examination reads as under:

"(iv) Each paper will be of two hours duration. Blind candidates will
however, be allowed an extra time of twenty minutes for each paper."

So far as Main Examination is concerned, Section 11(B) provides:

"(i) Candidates must write the papers in their own hand. In no
circumstances will they be allowed the help of a scribe to write the
answers for them. However, blind candidates will be allowed to write
the examination with the help of a scribe. Blind candidates will also
be allowed an extra time of thirty minutes at each paper @ ten minutes
per hour."

14.     Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance
upon the Guidelines issued by the Ministry of Social Justice and
Empowerment which provides for 20 minutes additional time per one
hour.

 15.    We have carefully gone through the Office Memorandum (OM) dated
26.02.2013 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Social
Justice and Empowerment, Department of Disabilities Affairs, New Delhi
under which guidelines were issued for conducting written examination
for persons with disabilities. It is evident from the said OM that the
guidelines were issued as per the directions of the CCPD to circulate
uniform and comprehensive guidelines for conducting examinations for
the persons with disabilities for compliance by all concerned.
Clause-XI of the said guidelines reads as under:-

"XI The word "extra time or additional time" that is being currently
used should be changed to "compensatory time" and the same should not
be less than 20 minutes per hour of examination for persons who are
making use of scribe/reader/lab assistant. All the candidates with
disability not availing the facility of scribe may be allowed
additional time of minimum of one hour for examination of 3 hours
duration which could further be increased on case to case basis.

 16.    It is also observed that the said guidelines were circulated to
the Secretaries of all Ministries/Departments as well as the
Secretary, UPSC requesting to ensure compliance of implementation of
the same.

 17.    It may be added that the Chief Commissioner for Persons with
Disabilities (CCPD) is an authority appointed under Section 57(1) of
the Disabilities Act, 1995 for the purposes of the said Act.   Section
58 of the Disabilities Act, 1995 provided for the functions of the
CCPD which included taking steps to safeguard the rights and
facilities made available to persons with disabilities.

 18.    That being so, the guidelines dated 26.02.2013 issued by the
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment on the recommendation of
CCPD apparently for the purpose of safeguarding the rights and
facilities made available to persons with disabilities, cannot be
treated as mere executive instructions as sought to be contended by
the respondents. According to us, the guidelines dated 26.02.2013
which are issued for effective implementation of the provisions of the
Disabilities Act, 1995, have statutory force and are bound to be
implemented by all the departments and authorities.

 19.    It is no doubt true that UPSC is a Constitutional and independent
body, however the Civil Services Examination Rules - 2014 are not made
by UPSC but according to their own counter affidavit, the Commission
is merely implementing the Rules notified by the Department of
Personnel and Training, Government of India. The counter affidavit
filed on behalf of the Department of Personnel and Training is silent
as to why the guidelines dated 26.02.2013 issued by the Ministry of
Social Justice and Empowerment were not complied with while issuing
the Rules for Civil Services Examinations, 2014 vide Notification
dated 31.05.2014.

20.     Be that as it may, the Civil Services Examination Rules, 2014
issued by the Department of Personnel & Training vide notification
dated 31.05.2014 which are only in the nature of executive
instructions, cannot override the statutory guidelines dated
26.02.2013 issued in terms of the provisions of the Disabilities Act,
1995 to ensure that a uniform and comprehensive procedure is
prescribed for conducting examination for persons with disabilities.

 21.    For the aforesaid reasons, we find force in the submission of the
learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents are bound to
allow additional time of 20 minutes per hour to the visually disabled
candidates in the Civil Services Examination, 2014, as provided in the
guidelines dated 26.03.2013.

 22.    Accordingly, both the CMs are disposed of with the following directions 
:i.
The Preliminary Examination in pursuance of the impugned notice dated
31.05.2014 may be conducted and the results be declared as per the
schedule.
ii. However, none of the visually impaired candidates should be
disqualified in Preliminary Examination on the ground that only 2
vacancies are reserved for the visually impaired candidates out of 26
vacancies reserved for physically handicapped category.
iii. Before the schedule for Main Examination is fixed, the
respondents shall ensure proper assessment of number of vacancies
reserved for visually impaired candidates in conformity with 1%
reservation provided under Section 33 of the Disabilities Act, 1995
and notify the same.
iv.      The visually impaired candidates shall be allowed additional
time/compensatory time of 20 minutes per hour in both Preliminary and
Main Examinations, apart from extending the help of scribe as provided
under the guidelines dated 26.02.2013 issued by the Ministry of Social
Justice and Empowerment.











-- 
Avinash Shahi
Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU


Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of 
mobile phones / Tabs on:
http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To unsubscribe send a message to
[email protected]
with the subject unsubscribe.

To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please 
visit the list home page at
http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Disclaimer:
1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the 
person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity;

2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent 
through this mailing list..

Reply via email to