Ensure Persons With Disabilities Scoring Above General Cut-Off Are Considered In Unreserved Vacancies : Supreme Court To Centre, States

The Supreme Court has exhorted the Union and the States to implement the policy of "upward movement" for Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD), as per which PwBDs, who score higher than the general cut-off on their own merit, will be considered against unreserved vacancies.

Noting that the Union Government has already issued executive instructions to ensure appointment and promotion of PwBDs on their own merit, the Court directed that the policy be adhered to in letter and spirit.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta passed the order.

To recap, in September, 2025, the Court had expressed concerns over the denial of general category seats to persons with disabilities who score higher than the cut-off marks for the unreserved category. It had said that such an approach would defeat the purpose of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The Union Government was asked to explain if appropriate steps have been taken to ensure that PwDs, who score higher than the general cut-off, are given "upward movement" by accommodating them in the general category.

In the latest hearing, the Court was informed by the Union about certain Office Memoranda, issued through the Department of Personnel and Training, in 2018 and 2022. As per these, a Person with Benchmark Disability (PwBD) candidate selected on the basis of their own merit, without availing relaxed standards, is to be adjusted against unreserved (UR) vacancies and not against the quota reserved for PwBD category. On the other hand, candidates who avail relaxed standards are to be adjusted against reserved vacancies.

The Court took note of the executive instructions and observed that they were applicable to both direct recruitment as well as promotions - including seniority-cum-fitness and selection-based promotions. While relaxation in cutoff marks, age, number of attempts, etc. were to be construed as relaxed standards, provision of scribe or compensatory time was not characterized as relaxed standards.

The Union's executive instructions further clarified that the disability of a person, which he or she is suffering from, shall not be treated as a relaxed standard in the medical fitness test for the purpose of determining “own merit.” The affidavit further emphasized that reservation for PwBD candidates operated horizontally across categories and that the policy of “own merit” is consistently applied to ensure that meritorious candidates are not denied their rightful placement while also safeguarding the interests of those requiring reservation benefits.

Perusing the policy, the Court was satisfied that PwBD candidates were entitled, on their own merit, to be considered against unreserved vacancies. At the same time, the purpose of reservation had not been rendered infructuous.

The Court called on the authorities to implement the policy in its true spirit so as to advance the constitutional mandate of equality, dignity and inclusion of persons with disabilities.

The Court observed :

"Having considered the aforesaid affidavit and the policy framework placed on record, we are satisfied that the Union of India has adequately addressed the query raised in paragraph 53 of the judgment and order dated 12th September, 2025. The position in law, as clarified, ensures that meritorious candidates belonging to the PwBD category are entitled to be considered against unreserved vacancies on the basis of their own merit, while preserving the efficacy and purpose of reservation. We, accordingly, endorse the said position and exhort the Union of India, as well as all States and Union Territories, to scrupulously adhere to and implement the policy of upward movement in its true letter and spirit, so as to advance the constitutional mandate of equality, dignity and inclusion for persons with disabilities"

Lapses in the implementation of the RPwD Act

Notably, the Court also observed that despite a lapse of 8 years since enactment of RPwD Act, 2016, the compliance by States/UTs has remained "elusive". Considering that almost all States/UTs had since appointed nodal officers, it directed that the 8 National Law Universities entrusted with "Project Ability Empowerment" by the Court (to assess the implementation of the Act) pursue the assessment. The task of assessing the extent of compliance with the RPwD Act by the Union was entrusted to NLU, Delhi.

"Such monitoring shall not be merely formal but must involve a substantive evaluation of compliance with statutory mandates, including the creation of requisite institutional mechanisms, enforcement of rights, and accessibility measures", the Court said.

Calling for cooperation by the authorities and nodal officers, it was opined that the appointment of nodal officers would provide an institutional framework which was lacking up till now, and help in collection of accurate data, redressal of implementation gaps, etc.

The Court also granted a final opportunity to the Union Territories of Lakshadweep and Ladakh to appoint Nodal Officers in compliance with its earlier directions issued for monitoring the implementation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

The matter has been listed on September 22, 2026 for receiving updated status reports from the National Law Universities.

Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves appeared for the petitioner.

Case Title: JUSTICE SUNANDA BHANDARE FOUNDATION Versus U.O.I. AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 116/1998

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 464

Click here to read the order