Delhi HC to SSC: ‘Make online portal more user friendly for visually-impaired candidates'
A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the directions while asking the SSC to consider providing the blind candidates an alternative mode to upload their photographs while applying online for various exams being conducted by the commission.
A plea filed by National Federation of the Blind's Santosh Kumar Rungta sought an alternative mode of uploading photographs for Combined Graduate Level Examinations, Combined Higher Secondary Level Examination 2025, and Multi-Tasking (Non-Technical) Staff and Havaldar (MTS and Havaldar) Examination, 2025.
The measure, the petitioner said, would help blind candidates 'whose eye conditions are such that it makes it impossible for them to capture live photograph through face recognition and upload them thereby depriving them of their right to participate in the selection process for recruitment'.
The petition termed the exclusion 'a clear case of discrimination and violation of fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution'.
The bench observed that the petitioner had forwarded 60 e-mails of such candidates to the SSC and directed the commission to look into the matter at the earliest.
'We request the SSC to look into grievances in these 60 e-mails. So far issue in petition, we will consider for future examinations. Larger matter is Likely to take time. SSC should revisit its policy to make its portal more user friendly especially for visually impaired. Revisit your policy,' the bench said.
The bench directed the SSC official to sit with the petitioner and settle the grievances.
'There are some issues that need to be resolved. In future be mindful. Come with your plans for future examinations,' it said and posted the matter on November 12.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
22 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Maharashtra BJP spokesperson gets appointed as Bombay High court judge, Oppositions demands actions
Rohit Pawar said that the appointment of a person who advocates for the ruling party from a public platform as a judge is the greatest blow to democracy. He said such appointments will have far-reaching consequences on the impartiality of the Indian judicial system. 'By merely possessing the qualifications to become a judge and appointing politically affiliated individuals directly as judges—isn't this tantamount to turning the judiciary into a political arena,' asked NCP SP leader. Pawar further went on to say that the principle of separation of powers is enshrined in the Constitution to ensure that no one holds unchecked power, to prevent the centralization of authority, and to maintain checks and balances. "Doesn't the appointment of a political spokesperson as a judge undermine the principle of separation of powers and, by extension, constitute an attempt to subvert the Constitution? When a person appointed as a judge in a High Court who has a political background and has held a position in the ruling party, who can guarantee that the process of delivering justice will not be tainted by political bias? Doesn't the appointment of a single political figure raise questions about the entire process of justice delivery,' he asked. Rohit Pawar further added that there is no objection to the qualifications of the appointed individual, but the appointment of such a person strikes at the sentiment of ordinary citizens that "justice is delivered without any bias. He asked the government to reconsider the appointment of Arati Sathe as the Bombay High Court judge. "The Honorable Chief Justice should also provide guidance on this matter," he said. On the other hand, Maharashtra BJP media cell incharge Navnath Bang said that it is true that Ms Arati Sathe was Maharashtra BJP's spokesperson, but before her appointment as judge of the Bombay High court, she had already submitted her resignation as party spokesperson.
Hindustan Times
32 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Suicide and the burden of social responsibility
The recent pronouncement by the Supreme Court in Sukdeb Saha v. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. (2025 INSC 893) transcends the confines of a mere legal dispute; it serves as an urgent call for introspection. While directly addressing the tragic death of 17-year-old girl who enrolled in a coaching student preparing for the NEET examination at Aakash Byju's Institute, Vishakhapatnam, the judgment is structured into two primary parts. Part A addresses the specific factual circumstances of X's death and the investigation, while Part B delves into the broader societal issue of student suicides and proposes interim guidelines observing with gravitas that the very "soul of education appears to have been distorted". The Court critiques the contemporary academic paradigm, especially the rigorous competitive examination systems, for fostering a "high-stakes race" where the "joy of learning" is supplanted by "anxiety over rankings", and "failure" is perceived "as a devastating end". The court further lamented that instead of fostering "dignity, confidence, and purpose," education has transformed into a 'pressure-laden path toward narrowly defined goals of achievement, status, and economic security," replacing the "joy of learning" with "anxiety over rankings, results, and relentless performance metrics". Vaccination (Getty Images/iStockphoto) The Court emphasised that mental health is an integral component of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, reinforced by India's international human rights obligations. It alludes to philosophical insights from Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Émile and Jiddu Krishnamurti's Education and the Significance of Life to underscore that true education should be holistic, nurturing reason, autonomy, emotional well-being, and integrated intelligence, rather than fostering fear, competition, or conformity. The current system, the Court argues, is a tragic deviation from these ideals. The disturbing statistics cited in the judgement from the NCRB Accidental Deaths and Suicides report, 2022 are a grim testament to this crisis: India recorded approximately 13,044 student suicides in 2022, with 2,248 attributed directly to examination failure. This number has more than doubled from 5,425 in 2001 to 13,044 in 2022. The Court reiterated the phrase "suicide epidemic" given in Amit Kumar & Ors. vs Union of India & Ors. (2025 INSC 384) to describe this alarming rise, attributing a majority of these deaths to "unbearable pressure imposed upon students by institutional and societal expectations". Emile Durkheim, the French sociologist and pioneer in the study of suicide, argued that suicide is a social fact shaped by collective forces rather than individual pathology alone. In India, several key social factors contribute significantly to suicide trends, including the disintegration of families, weakening of social bonds, the isolation that often accompanies urbanisation, property disputes, medical illness, examination stress, and failure in romantic relationships. The Union Government had taken several preventive measures to address student suicides. In 2023, the ministry of education released the UMMEED Guidelines to sensitise schools and identify at-risk students and launched MANODARPAN under the Atma Nirbhar Bharat Yojna to provide mental health support through helplines, counselling, and digital resources. The National Suicide Prevention Strategy (2022), introduced by the ministry of health, adopted a multi-sectoral approach focused on youth. Responding to rising student suicides, especially in hubs like Kota and Hyderabad, the Supreme Court directed the formation of a National Task Force on Student Mental Health, chaired by Justice (retd) Ravindra Bhat, to identify root causes and recommend reforms. The Court, invoking Article 21, recognised mental health as integral to the right to life, dignity, and autonomy. The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 further decriminalised suicide attempts, presuming severe stress and mandating State care and rehabilitation instead of punishment. India's obligations under international frameworks such as International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), and WHO's Mental Health Action Plan reinforced its duty to protect mental health. However, despite these efforts, a unified and enforceable national framework for student suicide prevention remained absent making urgent, coordinated action imperative, especially in high-stress educational environments. Recognising a legislative and regulatory vacuum and the urgency of the crisis, the Court, drawing parallels with the Vishaka Guidelines, issued interim guidelines under Article 32 read with 141 of the Constitution to establish a preventive, remedial, and supportive framework for mental health protection and suicide prevention across all educational institutions. These guidelines include mandates directing all educational institutions in India including schools, colleges, universities, coaching centres, and hostels, regardless of affiliation, to adopt uniform mental health policies; appointment of qualified counsellors in establishments with over 100 students, optimal student-to-counsellor ratios and mentorship during academic transitions; prohibition of unethical academic practices like batch segregation and public shaming; prominent display of suicide helpline numbers; inclusive engagement with marginalised students; confidential grievance mechanisms for harassment and bullying with accountability for institutional inaction; regular parental sensitisation programmes; and a focus on holistic development through extracurricular activities and exam reforms to reduce academic pressure. Suicide is a mirror held up to society, reflecting the deepest anxieties and failures that a person faces. This advocates for a call to action for policymakers, so that through interventions, a deeper connection, compassion, and a sense of community can be formed trying to heal the social fabric and bring hope to those who feel most alone. It also calls for the promotion of teaching well-being and happiness through education, empathy, emotional literacy, and destigmatised dialogue. This article is authored by Jisu Ketan Pattanaik, assistant professor, sociology and Sumit Kumar Singh, research assistant, National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi.
NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
At BJP Meet, PM Modi's Shoutout To Amit Shah, Message To Bihar Allies
New Delhi: PM Narendra Modi's speech at the Parliamentary meeting of NDA MPs was marked by his outreach to allies, recognition of their strengths and most importantly, a shout out to his colleague and home minister Amit Shah. The five most important takeaways: PM Modi commended Union Home Minister Amit Shah for being the longest serving Home minister after LK Advani. He said he had a long way to go and that this was just the beginning, sources said. He spoke on the efforts made by former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to get people like George Fernandes, Bal Thackeray and Nitish Kumar together. Vajpayee had referred to Nitish Kumar as "babu", PM Modi said. Had that not happened, it would have given a lot of time to others (Opposition) to "spoil the state with filthy politics," he added. PM Modi said the NDA believes in letting the stronger ally take the lead and play on its strengths -- a message specifically for poll-bound Bihar, aimed at reaching out to allies that are strong regional players. PM Modi also, according to sources, lashed out at the Congress, saying it was a strategic blunder by the Congress to demand a discussion on Operation Sindoor. PM Modi called the Opposition's demand for a debate on Operation Sindoor a strategic blunder, saying they lost badly in the discussion. Without naming Rahul Gandhi, he referred to Supreme Court observations and contrasted the Opposition's stance on the Constitution with their resistance to the scrapping of Article 370. He invoked Kashmir and the Ram Temple, urging MPs to also promote sports. The INDIA bloc, meanwhile, isn't backing down. Parties like Trinamool Congress, DMK and RJD, apart from the Congress remain firm on demanding a full discussion on SIR. While offering a middle path via broader electoral reforms, they believe silence on such a critical issue is not an option, especially ahead of their planned march to the Election Commission on Thursday.
