People with disabilities face many barriers to effective participation in society and the workforce. File | Photo Credit: The Hindu
TThe recent controversy involving Puja Khedkar, who allegedly faked her disability and caste to get benefits, has sparked a debate on the reservation given to people with disabilities (PwD). The issue gained more traction when a former executive officer of NITI Aayog tweeted that reservation for the disabled should be reviewed. Although he later clarified that he was only referring to mental disabilities (now drawing an unnecessary and groundless wedge between physical and mental disabilities), his statement, along with similar comments from other civil servants, raises troubling questions about society’s attitude towards people disability and reservation policy. .
Deep abilities
First, how many disabled people have interacted with the officer, or had the opportunity to get to know him? Have they ever been introduced to the challenges faced by people with disabilities, during a session or workshop? The deep ability described in the statement is a reality that many PwDs live in.
People with disabilities face many barriers to effective participation in society and the workforce. These include the challenge of infrastructure, education systems, and exam curricula and formats designed to be used by, and appropriate for, individuals who can. The reservation policy aims to level the playing field by providing fair opportunities to the disabled. That the few individuals who exploit these benefits should not overshadow the wider purpose and impact of these policies. Sweeping generalizations based on isolated incidents is unfair and counterproductive. Certain officers questioned whether persons with disabilities holding positions in the civil service had the “physical fitness” to perform their duties. These statements reflect the unconscious bias that many people have against PwDs.
Also read | The disabled staff got promotion quota from 2016
People with disabilities continue to face challenges in the education and employment sectors, but they are rarely highlighted. The 76th round of the National Sample Survey in 2018 found only 23.8% of people with disabilities, while the Labor Force Participation Rate at the national level was 50.2% in the same year. This can be attributed to lack of access to accessible education; stigma and bias at the hiring stage; and lack of adequate workplace accommodation for the disabled.
Why did Puja Khedkar’s case create a furore over disability quota?
However, this structural problem is hardly demonstrated by individuals who question the legitimacy of affirmative action given to the disabled. For example, take the case of Kartik Kansal, who is affected by muscular dystrophy. He has not been given service despite clearing the Public Service Commission (UPSC) civil service examination four times. Also, due to his disability, Ira Singhal had to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal to secure a valid post despite securing first rank in the civil service examination. This is a time when the conscience of our intellectuals must be stirred.
Potential for abuse
In a related context, the Supreme Court addressed the potential abuse of legal experts in Vikash Kumar v. UPSC (2021). The argument is that the disabled, if they are allowed to choose their clerks and if the percentage of disabled is less than 40%, they may abuse this provision. The court denied this statement: “If some incident of a healthy candidate hides chits in the dress code and blames him for cheating in the exam, the normal consequence is the appropriate punitive action against the student. Not to switch to a different dress code that is uncomfortable, therefore many competent students will find it difficult to sit during the exam and perform at their best.This principle should also be applied to the reservation for the disabled.
Certification system
India’s certification system for the disabled also has significant flaws. The practice of calculating disability by percentage is outdated and not supported by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Functional limitations, rather than medical percentages, should be the basis for assessment. Additionally, UPSC insists on separate and independent assessment of disability, thereby pursuing a government-recognized disability certification process that produces disability certificates and Unique Disability IDs (UDIDs). This results in the possibility of the two sets of estimates producing contradictory results
An additional challenge is the lack of specialists to evaluate various disabilities, which makes the certification process inaccessible and time-consuming. The complex assessment guidelines provided by the state are often unrealistic at the district hospital level, which is limited in terms of infrastructure and resources. This leaves the assessment flawed and wide open to interpretation. Psychosocial disability, whose assessment is relatively more subjective, is assessed based on the old IDEAS (Indian Disability Evaluation and Assessment Scale) scale. In many cases, these tests are not performed. People with invisible, hidden, or less visible disabilities, such as blood disorders, are often rejected because they are “invisible disabilities”.
The focus should be on addressing these systemic issues. Fraudulent act of Ms. Khedkar should be met with strict punishment. This is a solution, not an unwarranted review of the reservation system that provides important support for marginalized groups.
Rahul Bajaj, practicing lawyer; Co-Founder, Mission Accessibility; Senior Associate Fellow, Vidhi Center for Legal Policy; and additional faculty, BML Munjal University School of Law; Ayushmita Samal, Research Fellow with the Center for Inclusive Policy
