EARLIER this month, on March 3, 2025, the Supreme Court, in In re: Recruitment of visually impaired in judicial services v. The Registrar General, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, delivered its decision in a case concerning the exclusion and discrimination faced by visually impaired and disabled candidates in judicial service examinations across states, including Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. The Court held that Rule 6A of the Madhya Pradesh Services Examination (Recruitment and Conditions of Services) Rules, 1994 (‘MPSE Rules’), which excludes visually impaired and no-vision candidates from seeking appointment to State judicial services, is unconstitutional and constitutes indirect discrimination under Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution.
By moving decisively away from the outdated medical model of disability that relied solely on clinical assessments, the Court has continued to adopt a rights-based approach anchored in disability law. The ruling not only opens judicial service opportunities to qualified visually impaired candidates but also establishes novel precedents in disability jurisprudence by applying the principle of indirect discrimination, rejecting arbitrary classifications between ‘Persons with Disabilities’ and ‘Persons with Benchmark Disabilities’, and elevating reasonable accommodation to a constitutional imperative.
