Inclusivity in Judicial Appointments

The recent PIL filed in the Supreme Court, seeking four percent reservation in judicial appointments for persons with disabilities (PwD) as mandated by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016, highlights a crucial aspect of inclusivity and equal opportunities within the judiciary. This plea underscores the need for aligning judicial practices with statutory provisions to ensure fair representation and uphold fundamental rights. The principle of non-discrimination and equality is enshrined in both the RPwD Act and the Constitution. The Act, aimed at empowering persons with disabilities by providing them with opportunities for participation and inclusion in all spheres of life, including employment, mandates a minimum reservation of four percent in government establishments, including the appointment of judges to the district judiciary. However, the PIL reveals disturbing disparities and contraventions of this legal mandate across various states. The plea brings to light several glaring discrepancies, including the exclusion of certain specified disabilities from the judicial appointment process, inconsistency in reservation percentages among states, and the lack of consultation with the Chief Commissioner or State Commissioner as required by the Act. Such practices not only violate the rights of people with disabilities but also undermine the principles of equality and justice.
By ensuring inclusive practices in judicial appointments, the judiciary can foster a more equitable and representative legal framework. Furthermore, the PIL rightly calls for the framing of uniform service rules in line with the provisions of the RPwD Act across all states, ensuring that persons with disabilities are not arbitrarily excluded from judicial appointments. The Supreme Court’s decision to seek responses from the Centre, states, UTs, and High Courts on this matter is a step in the right direction. Upholding the principles of non-discrimination and inclusivity is not just a legal obligation but a moral imperative that lies at the core of a fair and just society. All stakeholders have to work together towards building a more inclusive and accessible judicial system that reflects the diversity and values of our nation.