On June 9, the Supreme Court of India heard a plea challenging the exclusion of visually impaired and locomotor disabled persons as well as non-resident candidates from the Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD) quota in the Uttarakhand Judicial Service Civil Judge (Junior Division) recruitment.
Read also: Supreme Court issues notice to Haryana Govt on plea alleging sexual harassment and assault of woman
The matter was taken up by a bench of Justices SVN Bhatti and PB Varale. The plea challenged the constitutionality of the recruitment advertisement dated May 16, 2025 issued by the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission.
The petitioner, who is a 100% visually impaired person, raised concerns over the notification that restricted PwBD eligibility to only limited sub-categories
- Leprosy cured,
- Acid attack victims and
- Muscular dystrophy
Thereby excluding candidates with blindness or locomotor disability.
The bench initially remarked, "In all these cases, we insist on moving the high court first… 100/100 we are convinced, you should move the high court first."
However, petitioner's counsel Amar Jain urged the court to hear the matter as a similar issue is already pending before the apex court in the matter of recruitment of visually impaired persons in judicial services. In that case, the court had struck down a rule of Madhya Pradesh Judicial Services which excluded visually impaired candidates.
While ordering the matter to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for further directions, the bench said, "The WP may be tagged subject to the order of the CJI."
Read also: NHAI moves SC against Madras HC order that stayed toll collection on Madurai-Tuticorin highway
The basic ground of the petitioner's contention is the violation of Section 34 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, according to which at least 4% of the vacancies in government establishments should be reserved for persons with benchmark disabilities, including 1% for blindness/low vision and 1% for locomotor disability.
Additionally, the exclusion of non-resident candidates from applying under the PwBD quota has also been challenged as arbitrary and unconstitutional.
In the Madhya Pradesh case, the Court had earlier held, "Visually impaired and low vision candidates are eligible to participate in the selection for posts under the judicial service."
The petition argues that the advertisement is discriminatory under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution and contradicts Supreme Court precedents.
It also pointed out that the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission failed to provide a scribe for the petitioner despite requests, thereby complicating the exclusion further.
Read also: High Court Cannot Use Suo Motu Powers to Enhance Sentence in Convict’s Appeal: Supreme Court
The main reliefs sought in the petition include:
- Quashing the advertisement restricting PwBD eligibility.
- Directions to allow persons with all standard disabilities and non-residents to apply.
- Compliance with the Supreme Court judgment in the Madhya Pradesh case.
- A fresh exercise to identify suitable posts for PwBD reservation considering modern assistive technology and reasonable accommodation.
The petition was filed through advocate-on-record (AOR) Vikram Hegde.
Case Details : SRAVYA SINDHURI Versus UTTARAKHAND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS.| W.P.(C) No. 570/2025
