SHIBLI K Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal has been preferred by the petitioner in the writ petition W.P.(C).No.3947 of 2021 against the judgment dtd. 25/7/2022 of the learned Single Judge. The appellant is a visually challenged person having 100% disability as declared by the Medical Board. In spite of the disabilities, he had acquired post graduation in MBA and M.Com in Business Operations, qualified NET (National Eligibility Test) with JRF in Management and Commerce Streams and pursuing Ph.D in Management and Commerce Streams. He had also published papers and book chapters. He has valuable industry experience as a Project Consultant and served as a Visiting faculty member at the esteemed MCA Department of Kannur University.

(2.) He had filed the writ petition in the light of the experience during the Kerala Administrative Examination (KAS), where he encountered some difficulties with the scribe provided to him. Two main grievances were raised by him in the writ petition; one is that no extra time was allotted to persons with disabilities (In short, PwD candidates) in objective examination conducted by the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC), for the post of Assistant Professor in Business Administration. The second grievance is that adequate assistance was not received from the scribe appointed, during the examination. During the pendency of the writ petition, the examination for the post of Assistant Professor was conducted on 6/4/2021 and as such, the writ petition became infructuous. Even then, the learned Single Judge proceeded to dispose of the writ petition on merits, as the decision on the point noted by the appellant will be of general benefit to PwD candidates. By that time, the KPSC has decided to give extra time for objective examination for candidates with visual disability and as such, that part of the grievance also no more exists. In the examination, the appellant was provided the service of a scribe from a panel prepared by the KPSC. The appellant is not satisfied with the assistance given by the scribe appointed by the KPSC and his demand is that a PwD candidate is to be given full freedom to bring his own scribe, for all competitive examinations.

(3.) After evaluating the rival contentions raised by both sides and discussing various decisions and the law on the point, the learned Single Judge had disposed of the writ petition holding that the fifth respondent (KPSC) shall provide opportunity to candidates with visual disability above 40% to interact with the scribe provided by the Commission at least two days in advance. If, after such interaction, the candidate finds the scribe to be unsuitable, the fifth respondent shall provide the assistance of another scribe from the panel of scribes prepared for the particular examination.