LexStreakRead free →
Supreme Court of India· 17 March 2023

When an examination body provides the scribe, must the candidate be given time to interact with the scribe before the examination?

ARNAB ROY v. CONSORTIUM OF NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITIES & ANR.
2023 INSC 261 · Writ Petition (Civil) No 1109 of 2022
Coram: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha; J B Pardiwala
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.2(s) Rights of Persons with Di…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Yes. At least two days' time should be provided to enable the candidate to interact with the scribe, so as to familiarise the scribe and the aspirant candidate, particularly where the scribe must read out and write the responses for a visually challenged candidate.

Headnote

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — s.2(r) — s.2(s) — Constitution of India — Art.32 — Reasonable accommodation — Scribe — Entrance examination — Guidelines — Notification in advance — Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Reasonable accommodation — Guidelines to be notified with the advertisement — Held: Guidelines governing the facilities to be extended to PwD candidates must be notified sufficiently in advance and, in any event, together with the advertisement placing the examination schedule in the public domain, so that candidates are not left in a state of uncertainty. (¶17) Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — s.2(s) — Scribe where disability is below the benchmark — Held further: A candidate with a specified disability who has difficulty in writing is entitled to the facility of a scribe and compensatory time on production of a certificate from the competent medical authority of a Government healthcare institution. (¶10) Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Qualification of the scribe — integrity of the examination — Held further: An examination body may require that the scribe be not qualified above the 11th standard and not be affiliated to any test-preparatory organisation or examination coaching centre, where it undertakes to provide such a scribe itself. (¶25, 27) Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Guidelines not frozen — liberty to modify — Held further: The nature and contents of such Guidelines cannot be frozen for the future and remain open to modification as experience is gained in conducting the examination. Writ Petition and Miscellaneous Application disposed of. (¶28, 29)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 26In other words, candidates appearing for the CLAT can either bring their own scribe or if it is not possible to do so, request the Consortium to provide a scribe who is then made available to the candidate. During the course of the hearing, it has been agreed that where the Consortium provides a scribe, at least two days’ time should be provided so as to enable the candidate to interact with the scribe. We are of the view that this is fair and proper. The scribe is required in the case of a visually challenged candidate to read out and write the responses to the MCQs. In order to familiarise the scribe and the aspirant candidate, it is but proper that sufficient time for interaction of two days should be provided. The guidelines also make a similar stipulation.
Acts & Sections
s.2(s) Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016s.2(r) Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016Art.32 Constitution of India

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of ARNAB ROY v. CONSORTIUM OF NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITIES & ANR. — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Must guidelines on facilities for candidates with disabilities be notified together with the advertisement announcing an entrance examination?Under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016, may a candidate whose specified disability is below the benchmark claim a scribe?Can an examination body require that a scribe be not qualified above the 11th standard and not be affiliated to a coaching centre?Can guidelines governing reasonable accommodation for candidates with disabilities be frozen for the future?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections