Earlier this week, the Supreme Court directed the Centre to examine the possibility of dividing people with disabilities into different categories in the civil service.
According to the bench of justices S A Nazeer and V Ramasubramanian, sympathy for disability is one aspect, but the practicality of the decision must also be considered.
An instance was shared by the top court in which a person with 100 per cent blindness was appointed as a civil judge in the junior division of the court, and the court interpreters could sign all orders he obtained. This person was later appointed as editor of a Tamil journal.
“I would like you to examine it. Some of them may not fit into all categories. The bench observed that sympathy is one aspect, and practicality is another.
For the Centre, Attorney General R Venkatramani stated that the government was investigating the matter and requested time to investigate it.
According to the court, the matter will be heard after eight weeks.
People with disabilities were permitted provisionally to apply for the Indian Police Service (IPS), DANIPS and the Indian Railway Protection Force Service (IRPFS) in the civil services by the Supreme Court on March 25. They were requested to submit their applications to the UPSC by April 1.
This order was passed during a hearing in which the National Platform for the Disabled challenged the Centre’s August 18, 2021 notification because it had granted a “blanket exemption” to all categories of positions within the IPS, Delhi, Daman and Diu, Dadar and Nagar Haveli, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep Police Service (DANIPS) and IRPFS from the provisions regarding reservations.
As stated in the petition filed with the Supreme Court, there is no information in the public domain to enable one to discern the reasoning behind the blanket exemption granted by the notification.
The impugned notification, which grants blanket exemption to all positions in the IPS, DANIPS and IRPFS, is deemed unconstitutional, contrary to the statute, and legally unsustainable for the following reasons: the impugned notification has manifestly excluded PwDs (persons with disabilities) from occupying even administrative and non-combat positions within the IPS, DANIPS, and IRPFS.
There was a petition seeking a quashing of the notification as it grants a blanket exemption from the grant of reservation to the PWDs under the IPS, DANIPS, and IRPFS.
The Department of Empowerment for Persons with Disabilities has also been requested to reserve suitable posts for persons with disabilities in the IPS, DANIPS, and IRPFS.