Podcast
Questions and Answers
What was the primary focus of the Supreme Court's intervention in the case regarding visually impaired candidates and judicial services?
What was the primary focus of the Supreme Court's intervention in the case regarding visually impaired candidates and judicial services?
- To address the denial of judicial service appointments to visually impaired candidates, ensuring they are not discriminated against based on their disability. (correct)
- To ensure that visually impaired candidates receive preferential treatment over other candidates.
- To lower the qualifications required for visually impaired candidates to enter judicial services.
- To completely remove all qualification criteria for visually impaired candidates.
What key principle did the Supreme Court emphasize to ensure equal opportunities for disabled candidates in judicial services?
What key principle did the Supreme Court emphasize to ensure equal opportunities for disabled candidates in judicial services?
- The principle of 'Reasonable Accommodation', ensuring disabled candidates receive the same opportunities as others, considered a fundamental right under Article 21. (correct)
- Relaxing educational qualifications for disabled candidates.
- Mandatory reservations exceeding existing quotas.
- Strict enforcement of existing regulations without accommodations.
Which rule was struck down by the Supreme Court in the case concerning visually impaired candidates in Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services?
Which rule was struck down by the Supreme Court in the case concerning visually impaired candidates in Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services?
- Rule 4A, which mandated that all candidates pass a vision test.
- Rule 6A of Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services, which barred visually impaired candidates from the selection process. (correct)
- Rule 5B, which required candidates to have previous legal experience.
- Rule 7C, which set a higher age limit for visually impaired candidates.
According to the Supreme Court's ruling, how should state governments approach the inclusion of disabled individuals in judicial services?
According to the Supreme Court's ruling, how should state governments approach the inclusion of disabled individuals in judicial services?
What was the significant relief extended to candidates from Rajasthan in the Supreme Court's judgment?
What was the significant relief extended to candidates from Rajasthan in the Supreme Court's judgment?
Which fundamental right does the Supreme Court state is violated when individuals with disabilities face discrimination?
Which fundamental right does the Supreme Court state is violated when individuals with disabilities face discrimination?
What is the implication of ‘reasonable accommodation’ as per the Supreme Court’s ruling?
What is the implication of ‘reasonable accommodation’ as per the Supreme Court’s ruling?
Which Act reinforces the provision of equal opportunities for persons with disabilities, as mentioned in the context of the Supreme Court's judgment?
Which Act reinforces the provision of equal opportunities for persons with disabilities, as mentioned in the context of the Supreme Court's judgment?
Based on the Indira Sawhney case directives, what specific measures were to be implemented for each category, including the physically disabled?
Based on the Indira Sawhney case directives, what specific measures were to be implemented for each category, including the physically disabled?
What is the correct title of the case that addressed the rights of visually impaired individuals in judicial services?
What is the correct title of the case that addressed the rights of visually impaired individuals in judicial services?
Flashcards
Rights of Visually Impaired
Rights of Visually Impaired
Denial of judicial service appointments to visually impaired candidates
Supreme Court's Ruling
Supreme Court's Ruling
Physical disability should not be a basis for discrimination in judicial services.
Reasonable Accommodation
Reasonable Accommodation
Ensuring disabled candidates receive the same opportunities as others; a fundamental right under Article 21.
Fair Participation
Fair Participation
Signup and view all the flashcards
Indira Sawhney Case Directives
Indira Sawhney Case Directives
Signup and view all the flashcards
Article 21 and Disability
Article 21 and Disability
Signup and view all the flashcards
Rule 6A of Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services
Rule 6A of Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services
Signup and view all the flashcards
Rajasthan Candidates Relief
Rajasthan Candidates Relief
Signup and view all the flashcards
Study Notes
Key Judgement: Rights of Visually Impaired in Judicial Services
- Addressed the denial of judicial service appointments to visually impaired candidates.
- Focus on Madhya Pradesh judicial services initially, then included similar cases from Rajasthan.
- A visually impaired candidate preparing for judiciary exams was denied the opportunity to become a judge in Madhya Pradesh.
- The candidate's mother wrote to the Supreme Court, highlighting the injustice of denying opportunities based on visual impairment.
- Supreme Court converted the letter into a suo moto case, acknowledging the importance of the issue.
- Rajasthan candidates reported similar issues regarding separate cutoffs and merit lists for physically disabled individuals not being implemented.
- Supreme Court combined all similar cases to deliver a comprehensive judgment.
Supreme Court's Ruling and Rationale
- Emphasized that physical disability should not be a basis for discrimination in judicial services.
- State governments must strive to include disabled individuals, enabling them to become judges and judicial officers.
- Rejecting candidates solely based on disability is unacceptable; they deserve an opportunity to participate in the judicial process.
- Supreme Court struck down Rule 6A of Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services, which barred visually impaired candidates from the selection process.
- Overturned the requirement of 3 years practice or 70% aggregate marks for physically disabled candidates aspiring to be judges.
- Relief extended to candidates from Rajasthan facing similar discrimination.
- Discrimination against persons with disabilities must be stopped and considered a fundamental right under Article 21.
- Individuals should not be denied the chance to prove their competence due to disabilities.
Principle of Reasonable Accommodation
- "Reasonable Accommodation" is a key principle, ensuring disabled candidates receive the same opportunities as others.
- This accommodation is not discretionary but a fundamental right under Article 21.
- Government must not pre-decide based on disability but must facilitate participation in the selection process.
- The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 reinforces the provision of equal opportunities.
- Ability should not be prejudged based on impairment.
- Examples include Justice Zak Yacoob, who served effectively, supported by technology, despite being blind.
- Individuals are entitled to prove their competence in judicial roles, regardless of disability.
Directives and Impact
- Directions issued based on the Indira Sawhney case, mandating separate cutoffs and merit lists for each category, including the physically disabled.
- The case is titled "Recruitment of Visually Impaired in Judicial Services vs. The Registrar General High Court of Madhya Pradesh."
- Fighting against discrimination towards persons with disabilities is recognized as a fundamental right under Article 21.
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
