{"id":272475,"date":"2022-08-27T17:00:17","date_gmt":"2022-08-27T11:30:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=272475"},"modified":"2022-08-27T17:00:17","modified_gmt":"2022-08-27T11:30:17","slug":"special-assistance-persons-with-disability-irrespective-benchmark-disability-legal-news-law-legal-updates","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/27\/special-assistance-persons-with-disability-irrespective-benchmark-disability-legal-news-law-legal-updates\/","title":{"rendered":"Kerala HC issues notice to Centre & State in a PIL seeking extension of facilities to every person with disability in need of special assistance irrespective of percentage of disability"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\n

Kerala High Court<\/span>: In a PIL seeking extension of facilities to every person with a disability in need of special assistance irrespective of the percentage of disability, the Division Bench of S. Manikumar CJ., and Shaji P. Chaly, J., issued notice to Union Government and the State of Kerala.<\/p>\n

The petitioner, a person with 25% learning disability, had approached the Court with an allegation that the disability criteria for the students in need of special assistance in the State Government schools for the SSLC (Secondary School Leaving Certificate) and Higher Secondary Examinations is still 40% or above and that the State Government has not framed any rules for the differently abled students as directed by the High Court in Blessen Baby<\/i> v. State of Kerala<\/i>, 2020 SCC OnLine Ker 714<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Noticeably, when the petitioner was studying in Class X, his request for a scribe as per Section 4(2) and 17(i) of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 for the public examination was rejected by the authorities on the ground that the disability should be 40% or above for the assistance of a scribe for the SSLC examination for the year 2020.<\/p>\n

While hearing the petitioner, at that time, the Court in Blessen Baby<\/i> case (supra) had directed the State Government to re-visit the guidelines in vogue issued by the Government of Kerala and to issue fresh guidelines, after taking note of the guidelines issued or to be issued by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Union Government in tune with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Vikash Kumar<\/i> v. Union Public Service Commission<\/i>, 2021 SCC Online SC 84<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Pursuant to the directions of the Court, the petitioner had passed his Xth and XIIth standard examinations with the aid of a scribe.<\/p>\n

In Avni Prakash<\/i> v. National Testing Agency (NTA<\/i>), 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1112<\/a>, the Supreme Court observed that despite the clarification of the position in law in Vikash Kumar (supra<\/i>), the law continues to be violated and NTA has continued to restrict the grant of facilities only to Persons with Benchmark Disability (PwBD). To address the hardships faced by the persons with disability, the Supreme Court issued the following directions<\/a>:<\/p>\n