The Supreme Court on March 12, 2026 directed the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) to process the appointment of two candidates with benchmark disabilities in suitable Group ‘C’ posts under the Indian Audit and Accounts Department. The Court disposed of the appeal after noting that the authorities had expressed willingness to accommodate the candidates in posts identified as suitable for their disabilities.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from the Combined Graduate Level Examination (CGLE) 2018 conducted by the Staff Selection Commission to fill various Group ‘B’ and Group ‘C’ posts across government departments. Among the vacancies were two posts of Auditor in the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, reserved under the category of “Other Persons with Disabilities.”
Read also:- Chhattisgarh High Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Against Judges, Says Allegations Based
A candidate, Amit Yadav, who had a certified disability of 55% due to mental illness, successfully cleared all stages of the examination and was recommended for the post of Auditor. However, his candidature was later rejected after the CAG’s office stated that the post had not been identified as suitable for persons with benchmark disabilities suffering from mental illness.
Following the rejection, Yadav approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), arguing that a 2021 government notification had identified the post of Auditor as suitable for certain disability categories.
Proceedings Before the Tribunal and High Court
The Central Administrative Tribunal accepted Yadav’s plea and directed the CAG to constitute a medical board to assess his fitness for the job. The tribunal further ordered that if he was found medically fit, he should be appointed to the post of Auditor.
However, the CAG challenged the order before the Delhi High Court. The High Court set aside the tribunal’s decision and restored the earlier communication rejecting the candidate’s dossier.
Read also:- Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Folk Singer Neha Singh Rathore In FIR Over Posts On PM
During the High Court proceedings, another candidate, Sudhanshu Kardam, sought to intervene. Kardam, who suffers from a specific learning disability and belongs to the Scheduled Caste category, argued that the outcome of the case could affect his own pending proceedings before the tribunal concerning the same recruitment process.
After the High Court ruling went against the candidates, Kardam approached the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court’s Observations
During the hearing, the Supreme Court examined the impact of a January 4, 2021 notification issued by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, which updated the list of posts suitable for persons with benchmark disabilities under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
The bench observed that the notification expanded the categories of disabilities entitled to reservation and revised the identification of suitable government posts.
During the proceedings, the Court asked the Union government to clarify whether the two candidates could be accommodated in posts suitable to their disabilities. The Additional Solicitor General sought time to obtain instructions regarding possible accommodation in appropriate categories.
Subsequently, the CAG filed an additional affidavit informing the Court that certain Group ‘C’ posts-such as Assistant (Audit) and Auditor-II-had been identified as suitable for candidates with benchmark disabilities including specific learning disability and mental illness.
The affidavit also stated that the department was willing to appoint the candidates in those posts once their dossiers were formally forwarded by the Staff Selection Commission.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Quashes Ombudsman Proceedings Against Village Officer, Says He Is Not
Court’s Decision
Taking note of the affidavit, the Supreme Court held that there was no longer any impediment to accommodating the two candidates in suitable posts.
“The respondent authorities are ready and willing to accommodate the appellant and respondent no.3 against Group ‘C’ posts identified as suitable to their disabilities,” the Court recorded while considering the affidavit placed before it.
The Court directed the Staff Selection Commission to forward the dossiers of both candidates to the CAG within two weeks. Once the dossiers are received, the authorities must consider them for appointment to the identified Group ‘C’ posts.
The bench further clarified that if the posts advertised in the 2018 recruitment process have already been filled, the government must create supernumerary posts to accommodate the candidates. Their appointment will take effect from the date they join service.
With these directions, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal.
Case Title: Sudhanshu Kardam v. Comptroller and Auditor General of India & Others
Case No.: Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (Civil) Diary No. 43728/2025
Decision Date: 12 March 2026
