On Friday, the Delhi High Court has strongly criticized the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) for its exclusion of individuals who are deaf or 'hard of hearing' from the reserved category in the recruitment process for teaching positions.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula pointed out that the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) disregarded both the established law and the most recent government notification when it released the recruitment advertisement for teachers in December 2022. Justice Sharma expressed his perplexity at the hostile treatment towards individuals in this context and expressed his disappointment in the actions of the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, stating, "I don't understand why we are hostile towards these people. I never thought Kendirya Vidyalayas would be doing all this. I feel sorry for the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan." Chief Justice Sharma also mentioned that he felt a personal sense of sadness about the situation since he himself is a product of the Kendriya Vidyalaya system.

The Court issued these remarks as it was in the process of finalizing its decision on a petition lodged by the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) concerning the contentious advertisement, along with a related suo motu public interest litigation pertaining to this matter.

Upon being informed that recruitments had occurred subsequent to the advertisement, the Court indicated its intent to instruct the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) to address the backlog concerning individuals with disabilities.

The counsel representing the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) stated that a committee formed by the KVS had advised against granting teaching positions to a particular group of individuals with disabilities. However, the Court firmly pointed out that since the Central government had not provided any exemption from applying the disability quota to the KVS, they were not entitled to do so. The Court emphasized that the KVS couldn't make such judgments unilaterally, stating, "You can't feel whatever you feel like doing... You are nobody to judge them. You are nobody. The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has to identify posts. It is not your job."

The Court also pointed out that the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) had relied on an "internal committee," which was in opposition to the provisions outlined in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act of 2016 and the notification issued by the Central government.

During the hearing, Justice Sharma also suggested that the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) should consider using a different word instead of "blind" in their advertisements. However, advocate Sanchita Ain, who was representing the petitioner organization, argued that their community does not prefer terms like "differently abled" or "specially abled." When Justice Sharma proposed using "specially-abled," Ain explained that they found it patronizing.

Ain further clarified that deaf individuals identify themselves as "deaf" because it closely reflects their experience. She emphasized that being deaf doesn't mean they cannot interact, communicate, or talk, and they refuse terms like "dumb" or "mute" because they can use sign language to communicate effectively. She emphasized the importance of using sign language, stating, "In order to listen, we need to have the content communicated in the same language we understand, that is sign language." In response to this explanation, Justice Sharma expressed that it was the first time he had encountered such a perspective.