RAJBALA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Visually impaired 75%, the petitioner applied for writing the Rajasthan State and Subordinate Services Combined Competitive Examination, 2018 in the category of OBC (Non- Creamy Layer) in the PH (low vision). Having been admitted to the examination the petitioner was declared successful in the preliminary examination and found qualified to write the RAS/RTS Main Examination (Non-TSP).

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that RAS/RTS Main Examination 2018 is scheduled to be held on 28/29/1/2019 for which the petitioner needs a scribe. It has been submitted that RPSC guidelines rather arbitrarily provide that although visually challenged candidates would be entitled to a scribe it would be one provided by respondent-RPSC itself to write the RAS/RTS Main Examination. It has been submitted that the said arrangement is in the cross-heir of Clause IV of the Circular dtd. 26/2/2013 issued by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Department of Disability Affairs, Government of India which allows a visually handicapped candidate to choose a scribe of her own choice to write an examination. It has been submitted that the petitioner's request for being permitted to choose a scribe for writing the RAS/RTS Main Examination 2018 has been mechanically negated by the respondent-RPSC. Hence this petition.

(3.) Mr. Akshat Choudhary appearing for the petitioner submitted that an identical issue had come up before this court in the case of Kuldeep Jaiman Versus State of Rajasthan and Another (SBCWP No. 4192/2017) which was decided on 24/3/2017. Therein after taking into consideration the opposition of the respondent-RPSC to the petitioner's right to a scribe of her own choice at an examination conducted by it, the court held that the petitioner would be entitled to a scribe of his own choice subject to the condition that the said scribe would be educationally qualified one step lower than the minimum educational requirement for writing the examination in issue. The court however allowed the RPSC to depute a special invigilator to oversee that what was being spoken by the petitioner/examinee was so only recorded (and nothing more) on the answer sheet by the scribe. Mr. Akshat Choudhary further submitted that the judgment in the case of Kuldeep Jaiman Versus State of Rajasthan and Another (supra) was followed by the Principal Seat at Jodhpur in the case of Ali Asgar Bohra Versus State of Rajasthan and Another (SBCWP No. 18922/2018) decided on 15/12/2018 wherein it was again reiterated that a visually handicapped examinee was entitled to a scribe of her own choice at the examination conducted by the RPSC albeit with the caveat that such scribe would educationally one step less qualified than the minimum educational qualification required for examination in issue and also that RPSC would be permitted to depute a special invigilator to oversee and ensure that what was spoken by the examinee was alone recorded on the answer sheet by the scribe.