On Tuesday, the Supreme Court permitted 31 candidates with various disabilities to participate in the interview for the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services Examination, provided they have secured at least 45 percent marks in the Mains Examination [In Re Recruitment of Visually Impaired in Judicial Services].
A vacation bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Sanjay Karol granted this interim relief in response to a suo motu matter concerning the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services (Recruitment and Service Conditions) Rules, which exclude visually impaired and low vision candidates from appointment in the State judicial service.
The Court was informed that although the 31 candidates, representing various disabilities, had appeared for the mains examination, they had not been called for the interview due to either lack of eligibility or failure to secure the minimum marks.
The Court observed that candidates must meet the minimum marks requirement. It ordered that if any of the 31 candidates have secured 45 percent marks, equivalent to the minimum marks for reserved category candidates, they should be permitted to participate in the interview.
The Supreme Court had previously taken suo moto cognizance of a letter from the mother of a visually impaired candidate aspiring to be a judicial officer in Madhya Pradesh. On March 21, the Court allowed visually impaired candidates to appear for the Mains Examination.
During the recent hearing, Senior Advocate Gaurav Agrawal, acting as amicus curiae, informed the Court that none of the 31 candidates had secured the minimum qualifying marks for the interview. He also highlighted the absence of a separate cutoff for candidates with disabilities, unlike other reserved categories.
In response, the Court questioned whether there should be a separate reservation for such disabled candidates, including the visually impaired.
Advocate Arjun Garg, representing the High Court, stated that candidates may not only lack the minimum cutoff marks but also fail to fulfill other eligibility criteria, such as having 70 percent marks in law graduation or three years of practice.
Considering the submissions, the Court noted the need for extensive deliberation on reservation for visually impaired candidates. In the interim, it allowed candidates with at least 45 percent marks in the mains examination to participate in the interview.
The Court clarified that its directions are subject to the final outcome of the case.
