Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. Petitioner, who is a visually handicapped person, has filed the present writ petition, seeking, inter alia, a writ of mandamus, directing respondent No. 2 to conduct the examinations- written, typing and shorthand for the visually handicapped, to he conducted by the Staff Selection Board, by providing question papers of written lest, typing and shorthand tests in bold or large print alongwith braille, both in Hindi and English.

2. The case of the petitioner, in short, is that petitioner is a visually handicapped person, falling within the category of (b)/(c), as specified in advertisement issued in the Employment News dated 15-21st July, 2000. The persons in these categories are not totally blind, i.e. those with total absence of sight, but are those who are visually handicapped with some degree of sight or vision. These persons, as per the petitioner, can, with the aid of lenses, etc., read bold print. Such persons, with the withdrawal of question papers in bold print, are now compelled lo lake the paper in braille. Thus, the candidates who are visually handicapped but not totally blind and eligible to appear, are deprived of taking examinations as they do not know braille.

3. At this stage, it would be appropriate to reproduce the criteria adopted by the Staff Selection Commission for the categorisation of the blind and visually handicapped. Clause (3) of the advertisement reads as under:

Blind: (Visually handicapped):

Blind are those who satisfy one of the following conditions:

(a) Total absence of sight;

(b) Visual acuity not exceeding 6/60 or 20/200 (Snellen) in the better eye with correcting lenses;

(c) Limitation of the field of vision subtending an angle of 20 degrees or worse.

6. The respondents further submit that this assumes importance since in a regular examination for persons with normal vision, the number of candidates is 14 to 15 lakhs for few thousand vacancies while the total number of candidates in ihe blind and visually handicapped category are about 3000 only. Thus, a person, though not being a visually handicapped person, on the basis of a fake medical certificate is able to take the examination due to the availability of the question paper in bold print, can secure for himself an immense advanlage. The plea, in short, therefore, is that on the basis of false and dubious certificates being obtained by the candidates of being visually handicapped, they get advantage over those who are blind and are taking the examination in braille. It is also urged that braille is an internationally recognised language for the blind and all visually handicapped persons are expected to know it.

7. The question requiring consideration is that persons who arc visually handicapped with impaired sight but arc not blind failing in the allegory (a) of the advertisement, i.e. having total absence of sight, should they be treated as totally blind and required to lake ihe examination only in braille ? I find considerable merit in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that persons with impaired vision but being in a position to read with the aid of lenses or bold print should not he treated as lot ally blind and compelled to take the examination in braille. There can be no dispute with the preposition that persons who are disabled or are visually handicapped should be encouraged to lead normal activity and join ihe mainstream, without being made conscious of or reminded of their disability or handicap. It would not augur well for the menial well being of a person who has not lost his sight lot ally to be compelled to learn braille. Merely because the respondents suspect that certain persons obtain dubious and false, certificates of being visually handicapped and may take advantage by taking the examination if the question paper is in bold print, is not sufficient reason. to deprive those visually handicapped persons not knowing braille form taking the examination and, thus, depriving them of an opportunity to compete in an examination, where reservation has been made for them. It is for the respondents to devise ways and means to obviate or eliminate malpractices or to have further safeguards in that regard, by prescribing the authorities, in whom they have confidence, as being ones who should certify the candidate being visually handicapped. Even at a post qualifying stage, if there are any doubts about certain candidates being visually handicapped or not, who have been successful on the basis of false medical certificates, the same can be eliminated as a result of a subsequent medical examination by which the genuine vision and sight of the candidate can be ascertained by scientific means and equipment.