PwD Candidates Can't Bring Their Own Scribe; But Can Select One From Panel Prepared By KPSC: Kerala HC

The Kerala High Court observed that the Kerala Public Service Commission's (KPSC) circular on providing scribes from a panel to persons with disabilities (PwDs) is in line with the Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act, 2016 (Act).

The Court dismissed an Appeal filed by a PwD candidate seeking permission to bring his own scribe to the competitive examination. The Court emphasized that the procedure for providing scribers to PwD ensures the integrity of the examination and reduces the chances of manipulations.

“At the same time, in order to protect the legitimate rights of the persons with disabilities, they are to be provided a suitable scribe for writing competitive examinations conducted by the KPSC. Therefore, a procedure capable of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of PwD candidates and at the same time, ruling out the possibility of malpractice will be an ideal one. The circular issued by KPSC is to be evaluated in the above background”, the Bench comprising Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice C. Pratheep Kumar observed.

Advocate Bonny Benny appeared for the Appellant, Senior Government Pleader B. Unnikrishna Kaimal Along With Standing Counsel P.C. Sasidharan appeared for the Respondents and Deputy General Solicitor S Manu appeared for the Union.

A visually impaired candidate with 100% disability filed a writ petition challenging the Kerala Public Service Commission's (KPSC/Fifth Respondent) practice of providing scribes for PwD candidates from a panel prepared by the KPSC. The Appellant argued that PwD candidates should be able to bring their own scribe. The Trial Court held that PwD candidates with visual disability above 40% should be allowed to interact with the scribe provided by the KPSC at least two days in advance. If, after such interaction, the candidate finds the scribe unsuitable, the KPSC shall assist another scribe from the panel of scribes prepared for the particular examination. Aggrieved, the Appellant approached the Court challenging the judgment of the Trial Court.

The Court framed the following issues for consideration,

“(i) Whether the PwD candidates are entitled to bring a scribe of their own choice, while attending competitive examinations conducted by KPSC?

(ii) Whether the service of a scribe provided from a panel prepared by the KPSC to such candidates will serve the requirement of Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act, 2016?”

The Court noted that the Act is a landmark legislation that upholds the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities. It is rooted in the principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The Act encompasses a comprehensive framework to empower persons with disabilities, ensuring their full and effective participation in society. It safeguards their fundamental rights, including life with dignity, non-discrimination, equality of opportunity, and accessibility. The Act also protects persons with disabilities from various forms of harm and abuse, while promoting their access to education, employment, and healthcare. It establishes mechanisms for grievance redressal.

The Bench noted that the KPSC is a body constituted under Chapter II of the Constitution of India. It is the duty of the Union and the State Public Service Commissions to conduct examinations for appointments to the services of the Union and the services of the States respectively. The KPSC is also responsible for making all arrangements for the conduct of the examination for the candidates whose applications are found to be in order. A Circular was issued by virtue of this power, making specific provision for providing the assistance of a scribe to PwD candidates.

“In this context it is also to be noted that the KPSC is a body constituted under Chapter II of the Constitution of India. As per Article 320(1) of the Constitution, it shall be the duty of the Union and the State PSCs to conduct examinations for appointments to the services of the Union and the services of the States respectively. As per the provisions of the Kerala Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure also it is the duty of KPSC to make all arrangements for the conduct of the examination for the candidates whose applications are found to be in order. It was by virtue of that power, Ext.P6 Circular was issued making specific provision for providing the assistance of a scribe to PwD candidates”, the Bench noted.

The Bench referred to the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Vikash Kumar v. Union Public Service Commission & Ors. (2021 (5) SCC 370). The Bench reiterated that the purpose of a scribe is to help PwD candidates understand the questions and mark or write down the answers. The KPSC circular guides for providing a suitable scribe from a panel prepared by them to PwD candidates on request. This ensures the purity of competitive examinations and rules out any manipulations. The conduct of the KPSC in declining the prayer of the appellant to choose his own scribe and providing a scribe from the panel prepared by them cannot be said to be arbitrary or unreasonable.

In addition, the Court noted that the trial Court had directed the KPSC to provide an opportunity to candidates with visual disability above 40% to interact with the scribe provided by the Commission at least two days in advance. If the candidate finds the scribe unsuitable, the KPSC shall assist another scribe from the panel of scribes prepared for that particular examination.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Appeal.

Cause Title: Shibli K v Union Of India (2023:KER:71417)

Click here to read/download Judgment