Mission Accessibility vs Union Of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025

MISSION ACCESSIBILITY ….PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ….RESPONDENT(S)

JUDGMENT

Mehta, J.

1. The measure of a just and inclusive society lies

not merely in the freedoms it proclaims, but in the

opportunities, it ensures for all its citizens to realize

their fullest potential. Equality, in its truest sense,

demands not uniformity but the removal of barriers

that prevent individuals from standing on equal

footing. The Constitution of India envisions a

Republic where every person, regardless of physical Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SONIA BHASIN Date: 2025.12.03 16:56:02 IST Reason: 1 or sensory limitation, can participate with dignity in

the nation’s collective journey. The law, as an

instrument of justice, must therefore move beyond

formal equality to ensure substantive inclusion,

transforming rights from written promises into lived

realities. It is in this spirit that the present writ

petition comes before this Court, seeking not

privilege, but parity; not indulgence, but the rightful

fulfilment of the constitutional vision of equal

opportunity for all.

2. The instant writ petition has been instituted by

Mission Accessibility1, an organisation engaged in the

advancement of the rights of persons with

disabilities, for enforcing the rights of persons with

disabilities to equal opportunity guaranteed to them

under the Constitution of India and the Rights of

Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The directions

1 Hereinafter, beingreferred to as “petitioner”.

2 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 sought by way of this writ petition include, inter alia,

the modification of the timeline for scribe registration

in the Civil Services Examination conducted by

Union Public Service Commission2 and for permitting

the use of laptops equipped with Screen Reader

Software along with accessible digital question

papers for eligible candidates. For the sake of ready

reference, the reliefs sought in the writ petition are

reproduced hereinbelow: -

“In light of the facts and submissions stated hereinabove, the Petitioner humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction in the following terms:

A. Declare and hold that the Impugned Requirement is arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, as well as the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. B. Direct the Respondent No. 2 to remove the mandatory requirement of furnishing scribe details at the time of application submission and instead permit visually impaired candidates to provide such details at a reasonable time closer to the examination date.

C. Direct the Respondent No. 2 to modify the application process for the Civil Services Examination, 2025, which allows candidates with disabilities to modify their scribe details at any time

2 Hereinafter, referred to as “respondent No. 2-UPSC”.

3 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 before any given stage of the Civil Services Examination.

D. Direct the Respondent No. 2 to allow the use of laptops with screen readers for visually impaired candidates at all stages of the Civil Services Examination.

E. Direct the Respondent No. 2 to provide question papers in accessible digital formats for candidates with disabilities opting for the same. F. Pass any other order/direction as may be deemed just and proper in the interests of justice, equity and good conscience.”

3. This Court vide order dated 6th May, 2025

allowed the impleadment of Department of Personnel

and Training (DoPT) as respondent No. 3 and directed

the counsel representing respondent No. 2-UPSC to

have a dialogue with counsel representing

respondent No. 3-DoPT regarding the apprehensions

and concerns of the candidates appearing in Civil

Services Examination. Learned counsel representing

respondent No. 2-UPSC was also directed to file an

appropriate affidavit of the competent officer with

respect to the change of scribe. The said order is

extracted hereinbelow: -

4

WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 “Application (I.A. No.95839 of 2025) seeking impleadment of Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) as respondent no.3 is allowed. Issue notice.

Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, learned Additional Solicitor General, is requested to also appear on behalf of the DoPT and obtain necessary instructions in light of the deliberations that have taken place in Court today.

Mr. Hrishikesh Baruah, learned counsel appearing for the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), shall obtain further instructions and have a dialogue with Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, learned ASG, regrading apprehensions and concerns of the candidates.

Mr. Baruah shall also file an appropriate affidavit of the competent officer from the UPSC with respect to the change of scribe, to be permitted within one week.

List the matter on 9th May, 2025.”

4. In compliance of the aforesaid order,

respondent No. 2-UPSC filed an affidavit stating that

it has till now received requests from approximately

27 candidates being Persons with Benchmark

Disability/Persons with Disability (PwBD/PwD) for

change of their scribe details. Respondent No. 2-

UPSC assured that it will examine each and every

such request on merit and revert to the candidates.

It was further stated that a press note with the said

5 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 details has been uploaded on its website after due

approval emphasizing that respondent No. 2-UPSC

will consider each request for change of scribe

received from PwBD/PwD candidates till 18th May,

2025 (04:00 PM) on merit basis. A copy of the press

note was annexed with the affidavit. However, the

affidavit was completely silent in respect of the issue

of providing the screen reader facility to such

candidates.

5. On 9th May, 2025, when the matter came up for

hearing, this Court perused the aforesaid affidavit

filed by respondent No. 2-UPSC and heard

submissions advanced by the parties. This Court

directed that all requests for change of scribe by

eligible candidates under the CSE Rules, 2025 shall

be entertained by respondent No. 2-UPSC till 18th

May, 2025, and each such prayer shall be objectively

considered and decided by a reasoned order within

6 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 three working days from its receipt. Respondent No.

2-UPSC was further directed to file a specific affidavit

clarifying its position on the use of computers with

screen readers by PwBD/PwD candidates in the

forthcoming preliminary examination. For ready

reference, the relevant extract of the said order is

reproduced hereinbelow: -

“6. Ms. Dave, learned ASG appearing on behalf of Union of India submitted that under the general instructions for preliminary and main examinations contained in the Civil Services Examinations Rules, 2025 (for short ‘CSE Rules, 2025’), certain categories of PwD candidates has been given permission to avail the facility of scribe. The candidates have the discretion of opting their own scribe or request the Commission for the same. The details of the scribe in case the candidates are bringing their own scribe or availing the same through the Commission, will be sought at the time of filling up of the online application form.

7. Regarding the issue of use of laptops with screen readers for visually impaired candidates, Ms. Dave has submitted that the same could be examined and a suitable decision can be taken by the Commission in consultation with the Department for PwD in light of the extant instructions issued by the Government of India on the subject. Any decision taken in the matter would not require an amendment to the CSE Rules, 2025.

8. Shri Bajaj has raised certain concerns about the criterion for the change of scribe as set out in the

7 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 affidavit on behalf of the Commission which are enumerated hereinbelow: -

“Prescription of a timeline within which such requests must be disposed of. It is submitted that candidates will need to make suitable arrangements based on whether their request is allowed or disallowed. For instance, if the Commission disallows a candidate's request for change of own scribe, the said candidate will have to take steps to request the Commission for a scribe or try and persuade the previously opted for scribe to remain available on the exam date. Therefore, clarity and finality on this front is important. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct that all such requests will be disposed of within a period of 3 working days. No clarity is given on the grounds on which such requests will be allowed or disallowed, thereby leaving the candidates in the dark. It is therefore prayed that requests for change of scribe should be allowed: [i] due to personal unavailability of the scribe; [ii] due to medical emergencies; or [ii] if the candidate wishes to opt for own scribe rather than the Commission's scribe. In no other circumstance should such requests be allowed.

Required documentary evidence: as of now, the public notice is silent on the supporting document that needs to be submitted along with the request for change of scribe. It would be helpful if the said requirement is clearly spelt out, to avoid needless back and forth. E.g. any evidence of the scribe's medical unfitness, when that is the ground on which change is being sought, could be asked for along with a detailing documents required for the induction of the new scribe.”

9. In response, Shri Baruah, learned counsel appearing for the Commission submitted that the date, i.e., 18th May, 2025 as provided in the press note is the last date for submission of the

8 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 applications for request of change of own scribe. He assured that such requests, if received within the stipulated time, would be disposed of within a period of three working days.

10. Regarding the issue of screen readers, Shri Baruah submitted that the portrayal made by the writ petitioners that only two candidates in the blind/low vision category are aspiring to give the examination by screen reader, is not acceptable to the Commission because in case a decision is taken accepting the proposal for providing screen reader facility to PwBD/PwD candidates, such option would have to be given to all eligible candidates and for the present, the Commission does not have the necessary logistical facilities for the forthcoming preliminary examination which is scheduled for 25th May, 2025. However, he has prayed for a short opportunity to file a specific affidavit on this aspect.

11. In view of the submissions noted above, we hereby provide that all the requests for change of scribe submitted by the concerned candidates who are entitled for a scribe in terms of the CSE Rules, 2025 shall be entertained till 18th May, 2025. The Commission shall immediately, upon receipt of such application, consider the same objectively and communicate the decision thereof by a reasoned order to the candidate/s concerned within a period of three working days from the date of receipt of the application/s.

12. The learned counsel for the Commission shall file a specific affidavit addressing the issue of the use of computers with screen readers by PwBD/PwD candidates in the forthcoming preliminary examination.

13. List the matter on 16th May, 2025.” [Emphasis supplied]

6. During the course of hearing on 31st October,

2025, the attention of this Court was drawn to the

9 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 additional affidavit dated 12th September, 2025 filed

by respondent No. 2-UPSC. In the said affidavit,

respondent No. 2-UPSC stated that it has

comprehensively reviewed the entire issue and has,

in-principle, resolved to introduce the facility of

Screen Reader Software for visually impaired

candidates appearing in various examinations

conducted under its aegis. The affidavit further

recites that while the decision marks a significant

policy advancement towards ensuring accessibility

and inclusion, the necessary infrastructure for its

effective implementation is presently not in place. It

has been averred that respondent No. 2-UPSC does

not maintain its own examination infrastructure, and

is entirely dependent upon the infrastructure,

logistical support, and manpower of the State

Governments, District Authorities, Schools, and

Colleges which are entrusted with the conduct of its

10 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 examinations. Respondent No. 2-UPSC has, however,

assured this Court that upon ensuring the feasibility,

readiness, and adequacy of the requisite

infrastructure and software, and after conducting

comprehensive testing to ensure the integrity and

security of the examination process, it shall extend

the facility of Screen Reader Software to visually

impaired candidates in its examinations at the

earliest possible juncture.

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submitted that the petitioner is satisfied with the in-

principle decision taken by respondent No. 2-UPSC

to introduce Screen Reader Software for the benefit of

candidates belonging to the Persons with Benchmark

Disabilities/Persons with Disabilities (PwBD/PwD)

category. However, it was contended that the said

decision, though commendable in intent, lacks a

concrete plan of implementation. Respondent No. 2-

11 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 UPSC has not yet indicated any definitive roadmap,

operational framework, or timeline for equipping the

examination centres with the necessary technological

and infrastructural facilities required for full

implementation of its intent, thereby leaving the

matter in a state of uncertainty as regards its

execution.

8. In response, the learned counsel appearing for

respondent No. 2-UPSC submitted that the

Commission is presently in active consultation and

coordination with the State Authorities, the National

Institute for the Empowerment of Persons with Visual

Disabilities (NIEPVD), and the Department of

Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, with a

view to finalising the technical standards, operational

modalities, and procedural safeguards necessary for

the introduction of Screen Reader Software and for

ensuring that question papers are made available in

12 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 accessible digital formats for eligible candidates. It

was further submitted that respondent No. 2-UPSC

is fully conscious of the imperative to maintain the

sanctity, confidentiality, and security of the

examination process, and that all necessary

precautions are being taken to ensure that the

introduction of such assistive technology does not in

any manner compromise the integrity of the

examination system. The learned counsel concluded

by submitting that the facility of Screen Reader

Software shall be made operational and available to

eligible candidates from the next examination cycle,

after due testing and standardisation of the required

infrastructure.

9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

and upon perusal of the additional affidavit dated

12th September, 2025 as well as the other materials

placed on record by respondent No. 2-UPSC, this

13 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 Court is of the considered view that a substantial part

of the grievances raised in the present writ petition

stand duly alleviated. Respondent No. 2-UPSC has

now taken a conscious progressive decision to extend

the facility of Screen Reader Software to visually

impaired candidates in various examinations to be

conducted by it, thereby recognising and advancing

the rights of candidates with disabilities to equal

opportunity and accessibility in public examinations.

10. However, it is equally evident that while the

policy decision has been taken, the mechanism and

modalities for its effective implementation remain to

be streamlined and operationalised. Respondent No.

2-UPSC’s dependence upon external infrastructure

and manpower, coupled with the absence of a clearly

delineated roadmap or timeline for establishing the

requisite technological framework across

examination centres, underscores the need for

14 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 institutional coordination and phased execution.

This Court, therefore, finds it imperative that the

creases in the process for implementation be duly

ironed out through concrete planning, inter-agency

collaboration, and the establishment of uniform

standards, so as to ensure that the laudable objective

of accessibility does not remain confined to paper but

is translated into practical reality in forthcoming

examination cycles.

11. In view of the foregoing discussion and in order

to ensure that the decision taken by respondent No.

2-UPSC is effectively translated into action and the

rights of candidates belonging to the PwBD/PwD

category are fully safeguarded, the following

directions are issued to take the matter to its logical

conclusion: -

A. Respondent No. 2-UPSC shall ensure that in

every notification for the examinations

15 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 conducted by it, a clear provision is

incorporated permitting candidates eligible

for a scribe to request a change of scribe up

to at least seven days prior to the date of the

examination, and such requests shall be

objectively considered and disposed of by a

reasoned order within three working days of

receipt of the application.

B. Respondent No. 2-UPSC shall file a

comprehensive compliance affidavit within a

period of two months from the date of this

order, clearly delineating the proposed plan

of action, timeline, and modalities for the

deployment and use of Screen Reader

Software for visually impaired candidates in

the examinations to be conducted by it. The

affidavit shall also specify the steps proposed

for testing, standardisation, and validation of

16 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 the software and related infrastructure

across all or designated examination centres,

and shall further indicate the feasibility of

ensuring that the said facility is made

operational and available to all eligible

candidates from the next cycle of

examinations.

C. Respondent No. 2-UPSC shall, in

coordination with the Department of

Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities

(DEPwD) and the National Institute for the

Empowerment of Persons with Visual

Disabilities (NIEPVD), formulate uniform

guidelines and protocols for the use of

Screen Reader Software and other assistive

technologies to ensure standardisation,

accessibility, and security of the examination

17 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 process across all or identified examination

centres, as deemed fit by it.

D. Respondent No. 1-Union of India, through

the Department of Personnel and Training

(DoPT) and the Ministry of Social Justice and

Empowerment, shall extend all necessary

administrative and technical support to

respondent No. 2-UPSC for the expeditious

implementation of the above measures and

shall facilitate coordination with State

Governments and examination authorities

wherever required.

E. It is further directed that the implementation

of these measures shall be undertaken in a

manner that ensures full accessibility to

eligible candidates while maintaining the

sanctity, confidentiality, and fairness of the

examination process.

18 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025

12. The aforesaid directions are being issued to

ensure that the constitutional mandate of equality,

non-discrimination, and the right to live with dignity

enshrined under Articles 14 and 21 of the

Constitution of India, read with the provisions of the

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, is

meaningfully implemented, and that the facilitative

measures envisaged by respondent No. 2-UPSC are

operationalised in both letter and spirit within the

stipulated timeframe.

13. Before parting, this Court deems it appropriate

to observe that the true measure of inclusivity in

governance lies not merely in the formulation of

progressive policies but in their faithful and effective

implementation. The rights guaranteed to persons

with disabilities are not acts of benevolence, but

expressions of the constitutional promise of equality,

dignity, and non-discrimination enshrined in Articles

19 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. The Union

Public Service Commission, being the premier

constitutional body entrusted with upholding the

values of merit and fairness in public recruitment,

must ensure that its processes are accessible,

transparent, and sensitive to the needs of every

segment of society. It is therefore imperative that the

directions issued herein are carried out with utmost

earnestness, sensitivity, and expedition, so that the

constitutional vision of equal opportunity and

meaningful participation of persons with disabilities

is not reduced to a distant aspiration, but is realised

as a living, enforceable, and enduring reality in the

conduct of all public examinations in the country.

14. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands

disposed of, in terms of the observations and

directions hereinabove.

20 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025

15. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand

disposed of.

16. List again on 16th February, 2026 for receiving

the compliance affidavit of respondent No. 2-UPSC.

….……………………J. (VIKRAM NATH)

...…………………….J. (SANDEEP MEHTA) NEW DELHI;

DECEMBER 03, 2025.

21 WRIT PETITION (C) NO(S). 206 OF 2025