The Supreme Court has directed the Centre to appoint 11 visually challenged persons to the income tax department within three months, after they had “run from pillar to post” since 2009 despite clearing the Union Public Service Commission.

They are eligible for appointment under the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995.

A bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mittal passed the verdict using the court’s extraordinary powers under Article 142 while disposing of an appeal filed by the Union government challenging the concurrent directions passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and Delhi High Court asking the government to appoint the visually challenged candidates to backlog vacancies in the PWD category.

Pankaj Kumar Srivastava — who is 100 per cent visually impaired — had cleared the Civil Services Examination, 2008, and opted for four preferences for services in the following order: the Indian Administrative Services (IAS), Indian Revenue Services-Income Tax (IRS-IT), Indian Railway Personnel Service (IRPS) and the Indian Revenue Service-Customs and Excise (IRS-C&E). However, even after having undergone the written test and interview, he was denied an appointment.

It was stated that several other visually challenged persons were denied appointment by the central government citing various objections which were rejected by both the CAT and Delhi High Court.

The apex court, referring to the affidavit filed by the Centre, observed: “In this case, the affidavits filed by the appellant-Union of India bring a sorry state of affairs on record. The appellant failed to implement the provisions of the PWD Act, 1995.

“Respondent number 1 (Srivastava) has been made to run from pillar to post to get an appointment though there is a large backlog of vacancies in various PWD categories…. He has been fighting for justice from the year 2009.”

Justice Oka noted that in the additional affidavit filed by the Centre on April 29, 2022, it was stated that there were 41 backlog vacancies for the period between 1996 and 2009, out of which 20 were of the category of locomotor disability or cerebral palsy, 5 of visual impairment and 16 of hearing impairment.

“Unfortunately, in this case, at all stages, the appellant has taken a stand which defeats the very objective of enacting laws for the benefit of persons with disability. If the appellant had implemented the PWD Act, 1995, in its true letter and spirit, respondent no. 1 would not have been forced to run from pillar to post to get justice,” the bench said while agreeing with the argument of senior advocate A. Mariarputham and counsel Rohan J. Alva for some of the visuallychallenged candidates.

The apex court issued the following directions:

 The cases of respondent no. 1 and the other 10 candidates belonging to the merit list of CSE-2008 shall be considered for appointment against the backlog vacancies of PWD candidates either in IRS (IT) or in other service/branch

 Necessary action of giving appointments shall be taken within a period of three months from Tuesday. The appointments will be made prospectively. The appointees will not be entitled to the arrears of salary and the benefit of seniority, etc

 Only for the purpose of retirement benefits, their services shall be counted from the date on which the last candidate of the VI category (PwD) in CSE-2008 was given an appointment

 The directions have been issued as a one-time measure in the exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 142 and the same shall not be treated as a precedent.