The Court noted, “Employers should ensure that minor errors caused by disabilities do not result in severe consequences, such as the loss of employment opportunities.”
In a recent case [Shanta Sonawane v. Union of India & Anr], the Bombay High Court granted relief to a woman with complete visual impairment who was rejected from employment with the Indian Railways on account of an error in the date of birth provided on her application.
A division bench consisting of Justices Nitin Jamdar and MM Sathaye emphasised that employers have an obligation to prevent individuals with disabilities from being denied employment opportunities on account of even minor errors caused by their disabilities.In addition, the Court stated that legislation pertaining to the well-being of individuals with disabilities ought not to be confined to the pages of the statute book. The Court ruled that authorities should apply the intent of the legislation with the necessary sensitivity and flexibility.
“As demonstrated by the instance of a candidate with visual impairment, administrative indifference can undermine the intended advantages of legislation designed to assist individuals with disabilities… It is not feasible to hold individuals with complete visual impairments, including the petitioner, to the same standard as other candidates with regard to routine activities. It would violate the principle of equality to reject the applications and then refuse to correct the errors, even within a reasonable time frame, on the basis of these blunders alone. In its judgment dated February 27, the Court stated that employers have an obligation to ensure that even minor errors caused by disabilities do not result in severe repercussions, such as the denial of employment opportunities.
Subsequently, the Court reversed the Ministry of Railways’ directive to withdraw the candidacy of the visually impaired woman, aged 31.
In 2019, the woman submitted an application to the Railways Recruitment Cell for the Assistant position. Following the rejection of her application, she filed a petition with the High Court.
During its deliberation of the case, the High Court ordered the Railway Recruitment Cell to maintain an assistant position vacant.
The authorities subsequently informed the court that the woman’s candidacy could not be approved on account of an error in her date of birth form, which read “1992” rather than “1993.”
The woman contended that, due to her visual impairment, she had requested assistance from an unidentified individual at an internet café in completing the job application; that individual, inadvertently, committed the error.
The Railways Ministry’s inflexible stance was deemed excessively authoritarian and severe by the High Court, in violation of the intent of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act.
“The Respondents (Railways authorities) do not argue that the Petitioner’s error was intentional or intended to accomplish a particular goal.” The Ministry has neglected its duty under the Act of 2016 by refusing to recognize that the petitioner’s case, which involves a person with a benchmark disability, requires a sensitive and flexible procedure. The Ministry has failed to fulfill this obligation, according to the Court.
The court subsequently reversed the woman’s unsuccessful application and ordered the Railway Recruitment Cell to reconsider and consider her for the position of assistant within a period of six weeks.
