443 May 26 2024

Case Summary: Hon'ble Supreme Court orders appointment of Bipolar Man as Judge [Bhavya Nain v. High Court of Delhi]

In the referenced judgment, the Court unequivocally denied any "discrimination" in employment against individuals with disabilities. The petitioner, who suffers from Bipolar Affective Disorder (BPAD), applied for the Delhi Judicial Services 2018 examination under the 'PwD' category (which includes Autism, intellectual disability, specific learning disability and mental illness, and multiple disabilities as outlined in clauses (a) to (d) of Section 34(1) of the RPWD Act, including deaf-blindness), for which two seats were reserved. The petitioner successfully passed both the preliminary and main examinations and subsequently appeared for the interview. However, in the final results, his candidature was rejected on the grounds that his mental disability was not deemed permanent according to the Disability Certificate he submitted. The petitioner then filed a writ petition challenging the result that rejected his candidature for the Delhi Judicial Services.

In his detailed judgment, Justice Sanghi thoroughly examined both legal and medical literature on mental illness, specifically BPAD, to understand its nature. Based on the judgments and medical literature, the Court accepted that BPAD is a lifelong, permanent, and incurable mental illness that can only be managed with medications and treatment, but cannot be cured. The Court further noted that individuals with BPAD can lead healthy lives, although they must continue treatment throughout their lives. The Court highlighted that the petitioner had been suffering from BPAD and undergoing treatment since 2010. Justice Sanghi observed that "Merely because they may need medication and treatment throughout their lives, or may suffer setbacks from time to time, cannot be a reason to deny them equal opportunity to assimilate in society, make their contribution, and have a life of dignity.

The Court further noted the intent and object of the RPwD Act which is to protect and preserve the rights of disabled persons, and employment is an essential aspect of utmost importance and the RPWD Act has to be read liberally, keeping in mind that it is a beneficial and social welfare legislation which has to be given effect to in order to protect the rights of the PwD, and not to defeat their rights.

The Court disposed of the case by directing the Respondent authorities to declare the Petitioner as selected for the Delhi Judicial Service without further delay, as he was the only qualified candidate in the “mental illness” category. The Court further ruled that upon his appointment, the petitioner would retain notional seniority along with his batchmates and be deemed to have joined his post with them, though he would not be entitled to any back wages.

The Court noted that a potential future eventuality cannot be grounds for denying employment. It held that when a government establishment provides reservation for persons with benchmark disabilities for any post, any candidate who fulfills the criteria must be presumed fit and proper for the position. The Court determined that the Respondent authorities could not assume that the petitioner would be unable to perform the duties of a Judicial Officer. Concluding the matter, the High Court set aside the final result that declared the petitioner’s disability as not permanent.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide Order dated 09.12.2021 upheld the Judgement passed by the High Court.





 Download Hon'ble Supreme Court Order

NOTE: This article is written by Adv. Alok Kumar, a practicing lawyer in the Delhi High Court & District Courts. For any complaints or suggestions, you may drop an email at advocatealok21@gmail.com.

Author

avatar
Adv. ALOK KUMAR
Advocate Serving Delhi NCR
Delhi High Court & District Courts
LL.B.▪︎Faculty of Law▪︎Delhi University


Comments are not allowed on this article.