Held: Paragraph 4 of the Office Memorandum stipulates that all recruitment agencies, academic/examination bodies under the administrative control of each Ministry/Department may be advised appropriately to ensure compliance of the guidelines – In pursuance of the interim directions of the Court, the Consortium of National Law Universities extended necessary facilities to PwD candidates in terms of the statement which was tendered before the Supreme Court. [Paras 11, 12]
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – The CLAT advertisement was issued on 28.08.2022 and the registration closed on 18.11.2022 – The Consortium issued its set of guidelines on 24.11.2022 and the entrance test was conducted on 18.12.2022 – Petitioner urged guidelines to be issued together with the advertisement: Held: It was directed that in future, the guidelines which shall be applicable for the facilities which should be extended to PwD candidates are to be notified sufficiently in advance and, in any event, together with the advertisement by which the schedule for the CLAT is placed in the public domain – This would ensure that candidates are not left in a state of uncertainty and know precisely the nature of the facilities and reasonable accommodation which has been made available to them consistent with the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. [Para 17] Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – Directions issued to the Consortium conducting CLAT:
Held: CLAT directed that, in the future, formulate the modalities in a manner consistent with its formulation which was placed on the record before the Supreme Court so as to obviate any inconvenience to PwD candidates – The consortium shall also take due steps to ensure that its guidelines are consistent with the Office Memorandum dated 10.08.2022 issued by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Department of Persons with Disabilities. [Para 19]
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – In the Common Law Admission Test, the Consortium had sought to prohibit scribes if they are (a) above the 11th grade in educational attainment; or (b) affiliated to any test-preparatory organisation or examination coaching centre – Propriety:
Held: In this backdrop, it is necessary, in order to maintain the integrity and sanctity of the examination, that the scribe does not provide independent answers to the MCQs based on their own knowledge or experience and hence the two-fold restriction has been imposed – Moreover, it has been submitted that in any event, if a candidate has any difficulty in engaging a scribe, the Consortium is ready and willing to provide a scribe so that the candidate is not prevented from appearing for the entrance test – Therefore, the request of the Consortium is allowed to the extent of its assertion that the scribe who is selected should not be qualified above the 11th standard and should not be associated with any test-preparatory organisation or examination coaching centre. [Paras 22, 27]
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – Facilitation of a scribe to the candidates – Where the consortium provides scribe, at least two days’ time should be provided so as to enable the candidate to interact with the scribe:
Held: In other words, candidates appearing for the CLAT can either bring their own scribe or if it is not possible to do so, request the Consortium to provide a scribe who is then made available to the candidate – It was agreed that where the Consortium provides a scribe, at least two days’ time should be provided so as to enable the candidate to interact with the scribe – The scribe is required in the case of a visually challenged candidate to read out and write the responses to the MCQs – In order to familiarise the scribe and the aspirant candidate, it is but proper that sufficient time for interaction of two days should be provided – The guidelines also make a similar stipulation. [Para 26]
LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES
Vikash Kumar Vs Union Public Service Commission & Ors. (2021) 5 SCC 370 – relied on.
OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.