For Prelims: Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016, Article 142 of the Constitution, Article 32 of the Constitution, Section 59, RPwD Act, 2016, Person with Benchmark Disability (PwBD), Petitioner, Certified disability (2020), Re-quantified disability (2026)
For Mains: Statutory certification, conclusive determination, jurisdictional overreach, Article 142 complete justice, RPwD Act 2016, Section 59 appeal mechanism
Source:
Indian Express
5 facts for one-day exams
SSC, railway, police and teaching exams ask direct questions like these.
- Rekha Sharma's disability was certified at 40% in 2020 under the RPwD Act, 2016.
- The Supreme Court directed her appointment as Civil Judge (Junior Division) on April 15, 2025.
- A Medical Board under Rule 25 of the RJSR 2010 re-quantified her disability to 30% in March 2026.
- The Supreme Court termed the High Court's application 'highly frivolous' on October 27, 2026.
- Only an appeal under Section 59 of the RPwD Act, 2016 can challenge a disability certificate.
Why in the news?
The Supreme Court has held that a Medical Board constituted under the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules cannot re-quantify a candidate's certified disability percentage. A woman with low vision, who had cleared the Rajasthan Judicial Service exam and was directed by the SC to be appointed as Civil Judge, was denied appointment after a board reduced her disability from 40% to 30%, excluding her from PwBD reservation. The SC termed the High Court's application 'frivolous' and reaffirmed her appointment.
Summary
- Rekha Sharma, a woman with low vision, was certified with 40% disability in 2020 under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016.
- The Supreme Court on April 15, 2025, directed her appointment as Civil Judge (Junior Division) in Rajasthan Judicial Service under Article 142.
- A Medical Board under Rule 25 of the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010, re-assessed her disability at 30% and declared her 'not eligible in PH category'.
- The Supreme Court on October 27, 2026, dismissed the High Court's application as 'frivolous' and directed completion of her appointment.
- The case highlights the legal principle that only an appeal under Section 59 of the RPwD Act, 2016 can challenge a disability certificate, not a fitness assessment board.
Highlights
Supreme Court's 'Frivolous' Ruling
The Supreme Court dismissed the Rajasthan High Court's application as 'highly frivolous' and directed the immediate appointment of Rekha Sharma as Civil Judge.
Medical Board Overreach
A Medical Board under Rule 25 of the RJSR 2010 re-quantified Rekha's disability from 40% to 30%, which the SC held was beyond its remit as it was only to assess fitness, not disability percentage.
RPwD Act vs. Service Rules
The case pitted the conclusive nature of a disability certificate under the RPwD Act, 2016 against the medical fitness assessment under state judicial service rules.
Background
Rekha Sharma, a woman with low vision, cleared the Rajasthan Judicial Service examination. Her disability was certified at 40% in November 2020 by the state's Department of Medical and Health, qualifying her as a person with benchmark disability under the RPwD Act, 2016. Despite securing minimum qualifying marks for the reserved category, she was not initially called for the interview. The Supreme Court, under Article 142, on April 15, 2025, directed her appointment as Civil Judge (Junior Division).
Key Analysis and Impact
The core legal issue is whether a Medical Board constituted under state service rules can re-quantify a disability percentage already certified under the RPwD Act. The Supreme Court's dismissal of the High Court's application as 'frivolous' reaffirms that a disability certificate is a statutory certification conclusive for all purposes, including reservation eligibility. Only an appeal under Section 59 of the RPwD Act can challenge it. This ruling protects the rights of persons with benchmark disabilities from being undermined by administrative boards lacking statutory authority to requantify.
Way Forward
The Supreme Court's order directs the Rajasthan High Court to complete Rekha's appointment process. This case sets a precedent for other states where similar re-quantifications by medical boards may occur. It clarifies the jurisdictional limits of medical boards under service rules and reinforces the need for strict adherence to the appellate mechanism under the RPwD Act. Future cases involving disability re-assessment during recruitment may now be challenged more effectively.
Disability Assessment vs. Fitness Assessment
| Aspect | Disability Certification | Fitness Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Authority | Certifying authority under RPwD Act | Medical Board under Service Rules |
| Purpose | Determine disability percentage for reservation | Assess fitness to discharge duties |
| Legal basis | RPwD Act, 2016 | Rule 25, RJSR 2010 |
Rajasthan connection
Matters for these Rajasthan exams:RPSC RAS 8/10
Background GK
Textbook concepts you need to understand this news
- Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016
- The central legislation that replaced the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. It defines 'person with benchmark disability' as one with at least 40% disability and provides for reservation in education and employment.
- Article 142 of the Constitution
- Empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or order necessary for doing 'complete justice' in any cause or matter pending before it. It is a plenary power used to fill legal gaps and ensure justice.
- Article 32 of the Constitution
- The 'right to constitutional remedies' which allows an individual to directly approach the Supreme Court for enforcement of fundamental rights. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar called it the 'heart and soul of the Constitution'.
- Section 59, RPwD Act, 2016
- Provides for an appeal mechanism against any order or decision of the certifying authority regarding disability certification. The appeal lies to the prescribed appellate authority within a specified time.
- Person with Benchmark Disability (PwBD)
- Defined under Section 2(r) of the RPwD Act, 2016 as a person with at least 40% of a specified disability. Such persons are eligible for reservation benefits in education and public employment.
Facts to remember
Tap a card to see the answer. Try to recall it first.
How exams will ask this
- Data: Rekha Sharma's disability was certified at 40% (2020) and re-quantified to 30% (2026). The Supreme Court's order directing appointment was on April 15, 2025.
- Nodal Body: Supreme Court of India; Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
- Legal Point: Article 142 (complete justice), Article 32 (writ jurisdiction), Section 59 (appeal against disability certification) of the RPwD Act, 2016, and Rules 24-26 of the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010.
Don't make this mistake!
Examiners may confuse the roles of different authorities: a Medical Board under service rules can assess 'fitness to discharge duties' but cannot 're-quantify disability percentage.' The trap is to treat a fitness assessment as a valid re-determination of disability, which the SC has clearly rejected. Also, the appeal under Section 59 of the RPwD Act is the only way to challenge a disability certificate, not a medical board under service rules.
Write these in mains answers
- Statutory certification, conclusive determination, jurisdictional overreach, Article 142 complete justice, RPwD Act 2016, Section 59 appeal mechanism
Stuck? Get it in one tap
Rekha Sharma, a woman with low vision, cleared her exams to become a judge in Rajasthan. The Supreme Court ordered her appointment. But a medical board said her disability was 30%, not 40%, so she was denied the job. The Supreme Court said the board had no right to change her disability percentage and ordered the High Court to appoint her immediately.
- Rekha Sharma's disability was certified at 40% in 2020 under the RPwD Act, 2016.
- The Supreme Court directed her appointment as Civil Judge (Junior Division) on April 15, 2025.
- A Medical Board under Rule 25 of the RJSR 2010 re-quantified her disability to 30% in March 2026.
- The Supreme Court termed the High Court's application 'highly frivolous' on October 27, 2026.
- Only an appeal under Section 59 of the RPwD Act, 2016 can challenge a disability certificate.
- Polity: Supreme Court and its powers (Article 142, Article 32)
- Governance: Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016
Related concepts: Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016, Article 142 of the Constitution, Article 32 of the Constitution, Section 59, RPwD Act, 2016
Practice questions
Pick an answer, then read the explanation.
- Q1Easy
Which constitutional article empowers the Supreme Court to pass any order necessary for doing 'complete justice' in a case before it?
Explanation: Article 142 of the Constitution grants the Supreme Court the plenary power to pass any decree or order for doing complete justice. Article 32 is the right to constitutional remedies, Article 136 deals with special leave to appeal, and Article 226 gives High Courts the power to issue writs.
- Q2Hard
Consider the following statements regarding the recent Supreme Court ruling on disability re-quantification:
- 1.The Supreme Court directed the appointment of a woman with low vision as Civil Judge under Article 142.
- 2.A Medical Board under the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules can re-quantify a candidate's disability percentage for reservation purposes.
- 3.The only way to challenge a disability certificate is through an appeal under Section 59 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct: the SC directed her appointment under Article 142 on April 15, 2025. Statement 2 is incorrect: the SC held that a Medical Board under service rules can only assess fitness, not re-quantify disability. Statement 3 is correct: Section 59 of the RPwD Act provides the appeal mechanism against a disability certificate.
- Q3Medium
What was the disability percentage recorded in Rekha Sharma's certificate issued by the Rajasthan government's Department of Medical and Health in 2020?
Explanation: The disability certificate issued on November 2, 2020 recorded 40% visual disability (low vision). This was later re-quantified to 30% by a Medical Board in March 2026, which the Supreme Court rejected.
- Q4Medium
What is the primary legal principle established by the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Rekha Sharma?
Explanation: The SC held that a Medical Board constituted to assess fitness cannot re-quantify a disability percentage already certified under the RPwD Act. The certificate remains conclusive unless challenged through an appeal under Section 59 of the Act.
Frequently asked questions
1. Who is Rekha Sharma and why did she have to wait 1.5 years for judgeship?
Rekha Sharma is a woman with low vision who cleared the Rajasthan Judicial Service exam. Despite a Supreme Court order in April 2025 directing her appointment as Civil Judge, a medical board re-quantified her disability from 40% to 30%, excluding her from reservation. The SC finally dismissed the High Court's application as frivolous in October 2026.
2. What did the Supreme Court rule about disability re-quantification by medical boards?
The Supreme Court held that a Medical Board constituted under state service rules can only assess a candidate's fitness to discharge duties, not re-quantify a disability percentage already certified under the RPwD Act, 2016.
3. Which constitutional articles and legal provisions were involved in this case?
Article 142 (complete justice) was used to direct Rekha's appointment, Article 32 (writ jurisdiction) was invoked to challenge the re-quantification, and Section 59 of the RPwD Act, 2016 provides the appeal mechanism against a disability certificate.
4. What is a 'person with benchmark disability' under the RPwD Act, 2016?
A person with benchmark disability is defined as having at least 40% of a specified disability. Such persons are eligible for reservation benefits in education and public employment.
All sources
- Original7 November 2026 · Read story
