STATE OF KERALA Vs. BLESSON BABY (MINOR)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises from the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C).No.4499/2020. The writ petition was filed by one Blessen Baby, a minor represented by his next friend & father Sri.Baby.M.C. The grievance of the writ petitioner was that his request for the assistance of a scribe, and for extra time to complete the SSLC examination, was rejected, purportedly with reference to certain guidelines issued by the Government regarding the conduct of SSLC examinations in the State of Kerala. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the guidelines cannot run counter to the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 [hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'].

(2.) The learned Single Judge, on a consideration of the matter, found that the right to get the assistance of a scribe and for extra time to complete the SSLC examination was, in terms of the provisions contained in Section 17 (i) of the Act, to be extended to 'persons with disability' as defined in Section 2(s) of the Act and not only to persons with a 'benchmark disability' as defined in Section 2(r) of the Act. Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed, and appropriate directions were issued by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge also found that the guidelines issued by the Government in respect of the conduct of the SSLC examination, which prescribes that a minimum 40% disability is required for getting the assistance of a scribe, is contrary to the provisions of the Act. On the facts, the learned Single Judge also noticed that the writ petitioner was a differently-abled child having a borderline IQ of 76 with dyslexia as certified by a competent Medical Board.

(3.) Inasmuch as the facts are as above, and noticing that the learned Single Judge has confined the directions issued to the facts of the case, and has further directed that the judgment shall not be treated as a precedent in any manner, we do not think that the State of Kerala or its officers had any grievance warranting the filing of this intra Court appeal under Section 5 of the High Court Act. The Writ Appeal will, therefore, stand dismissed.