DHANANJAYA Y.CHANDRACHUD,J. - (1.) Factual background B. The course run: The Tribunal and High Court of Delhi C. These proceedings C.1 Arguments of the appellant C.2 Arguments of the UPSC C.3. Arguments of the Union of India D. The legal framework E. Two Government Ministries: A policy disconnect F. Benchmark disability not a precondition to obtaining a scribe G. Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016: A paradigm-shift G.1 A statutory manifestation of a constitutional commitment G.2 Scheme of the 2016 Act H. Reasonable accommodation I. The argument of misuse J. The language of our discourse K. Realizing the transformative potential of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016: From principle to practice L. Case of the appellant M. Formulation of new policy concerning access to scribes for persons with disabilities N. In summation A. Factual background 1. A citizen who suffers from a writer's cramp has travelled to this Court. The grievance is that he was denied a scribe in the civil services examination[1]. The case has run its course through the judicial system as an individual grievance. But its contours present portents of the aspirations of a whole class of persons whose daily engagement with physical disability defines their continuing quest for dignity. Through a maze of statutes, rules, and regulations, the case raises core issues about the actual realization of equal opportunity and access to the disabled. It tests what the law professes with how its ideals are realized. The language of our discourse, as much as its outcome, should generate introspection over the path which our society has traversed and the road that lies ahead in realizing the rights of the disabled. Voices such as those of the appellant are a constant reminder of the chasm between the law and reality. But they also provide a platform for change and evolution towards a better future. [1] "CSE"
(2.) Down to its bare bones, this appeal turns upon the interface of the Civil Services Examination Rules 2018[2] dated 7 February 2018 with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016[3]. [2] "CSE Rules 2018" [3] "RPwD Act, 2016"
(3.) The appellant has a disability in the form of dysgraphia, commonly known as a Writer's Cramp. In August 2016, he graduated with an MBBS degree from the Jawaharlal Nehru Institute of Post Graduate Medical Instruction and Research, popularly known by the acronym JIPMER. Intending to pursue a career in the civil services, he appeared in 2017 for the CSE. A scribe was provided to him by the Union Public Services Commission[4] to enable him to appear in the written test. In the online application form for CSE 2017, the appellant declared himself to be a person with locomotor disability to avail the services of a scribe. On 7 February 2018, UPSC issued a notification for the CSE 2018[5]. The Department of Personnel and Training[6] issued the CSE Rules 2018 providing for the manner and conduct of the examination. The general instructions provided that all candidates must write their papers in their own hand and will not be allowed the help of a scribe. Exceptions to this rule were provided for blind candidates; candidates with locomotor disability and cerebral palsy where the "dominant (writing) is affected to the extent of slowing the performance of function (minimum of 40% impairment)". Candidates within the exception were allowed the help of a scribe. An additional 'compensatory time' of twenty minutes per hour was also to be granted to such candidates. [4] "UPSC" [5] "CSE Notification 2018" [6] "DoPT" ;