Friends, the office of CCPD has sent notices to the UGC and CBSE to
respond within 1 month. unedited scanned Letter is pasted below.
CCPD0001.pdf
~
I
~
I
C't
~
:!~
3lPlCfiT
.~
<t>
C't
I~
Court
of
Chief
Commissioner
for
Persons
with
Disabilities
f11l11F0iCf)
«n<:l
~
~Cf)IRC11
J:j~IC'1<:l
Ministry
of
Social
Justice
&.
Empowerment
fc)Cf)C'1i~I"iF1
'Fl~
IFclf1Cf)x0I
fcr.TrT
Department
of
Empowerment
of
Persons
with
Disabilities
table with 4 columns and 6 rows
Cas
e
No
.
4712/1041/201
5
}f
0
t,
)
b
·
Date
d
Despatc
h
I
C
0
2
.201
5
N
o
.
T
o
1
.
Th
e
Secretary
,
Universit
y
Grant
s
Commission
,
Bahadu
r
Sha
h
Zafa
r
Marg
,
Ne
w
Oelhi-1
1
000
2
table end
2.
The Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education, Shiksha Kendra,
2, Community Centre, Preet Vihar, Oelhi-110301
Subject:
Email
dated
02.07.2015
of
Shri
Avinash
Shahi
regarding
violation
of
Guidelines
for
conducting
written
examination
for
persons
with
disabilities
issued
by
Ministry
of
Social
Justice
&
Empowerment,
Department
of
Disability
Affairs
vide
Office
Memorandum
No.16-110/2003-DD.111
dated
26.02.2013
in
UGC-NET
Examination
June
2015
conducted
by
CBSE
*****
Sir,
Please
find
enclosed
a
copy
of
email
dated
02.07.2015
received
from
Shri
Avinash
Shahi
on
the
above
mentioned
subject
which
is
self-explanatory.
2.
The applicant has pointed out various irregularities regarding
violation of the Guidelines for conducting written examination for
persons with disabilities
issued by Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Department of
Disability Affairs vide Office Memorandum NO.16-110/2003-00.111 dated
26.02.2013 at the
various examination centres of the UGC-NET Examination June 2015
conducted by Central Board of Secondary Examination. As quoted by him,
some of the irregularities
are reproduced as under:
(i)
Instead of verifying candidate-own scribe's document on the date of
examination, The CBSE imposed extra burden and asked blind candidates'
to take permission
one day prior to the exam. Now one could easily apply one's common
sense to comprehend the discrimination. When the aii non-disabied
aspirants were busy
doing last-minute preparation, blind candidates struggled from pillar
to post in reaching the different centres for availing permission to
use writers.
Most of them who
fi'!lRl1-1"1~.
6.~
<m1
i10.~
~-11
0001/
Sarojini
House,
6,
Bhagwan
Dass
Road,
New
Delhi
-110001
~/Tel.:
23386054,
23386154
~/Fax:
23386006
~Glfil~C:/Website:
www.ccdisabilities.nic.in
~/E-mail:
ccpd@nicin
(cp:mr
~
ii~H"*
fm;
~
~/~
fi'0m
~
fm]'1)
W
(Please
quote
the
above
file/case
number
in
future
correspondence.)
Please
recycle
QS&
-2
are
very
poor,
were
forced
to
incur
extra
money
unnecessarily
courtesy
the
CBSE.
(Avinash
Shahi
Delhi).
(ii)
My centre was at New Spot Public School in Vivek Vihaar. When I asked
about scribe's fee ,they told me that why did you use scribe when we
provide braill
question paper? I told them mam, yes you provide me question paper in
braill but you remember that you didn't provide me answersheet in
braill. She completely
lost her point. Finally they didn't give my scribe's his fee. (Man ish
Jaiswal Delhi).
(iii)
A visually impaired girl has been out rightly denied permission to
take the exam at a center in Coimbatore, Tamilnadu. Ms. Bereni, who
has just passed out
of her M.A in English from Pondicherry University, informed me the
following yesterday: Those at the exam center in Coimbatore did not
provide a scribe,
and also denied entry to the scribe she took with her. They told her
that she should have obtained permission for bringing her own scribe
one week earlier.
They also told her that even otherwise she should have informed the
exam center one week earlier that she would not bring her own scribe
and hence they
themselves should (kindly) arrange one. Ultimately she was turned down
even though she had brought a scribe with herself, and requested them
to arrange
anyone of their own choice. (Muruganandan Tamil Nadu).
(iv)
The above personal narratives are just in no way could be construed as
representational. Blind candidates in Odisha, UP, Bihar, MP and in the
whole of north
east who have no internet connectivity suffered the ill-treatment at
the examination Centres.
The
complainant
has
further
pointed
out
that
the
provision
imposed
by
the
UGC
is
contrary
to
the
aforesaid
Office
Memorandum
NO.16-110/2003-DD.111
dated
26.02.2013
issued
by
Government
of
India.
He
has
requested
this
Court
that
(i)
UGC
should
be
directed
to
re-conduct
NET
Examination
for
those
candidates
who
were
arbitrarily
denied
to
appear
in
the
examination.
(ii)
To
ensure
that
the
Office
Memorandum
NO.16-110/2003-DD.11I
dated
26.02.2013
has
been
enforced
scrupulously
in
letter
and
spirit.
3.
Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Department of Disability
Affairs (now renamed as Department of Empowerment of Persons with
Disabilities), vide
Office Memorandum NO.16-110/2003 00.111 dated 26.02.2013 has issued a
comprehensive guidelines for conducting written examination for
persons with disabilities.
A clarification on clauses IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, XI and XV of the
aforesaid office memorandum has also been issued from this Court vide
letter NO.10413929/2007
& 65/1041/12-13 dated 18.03.2013 to Director, Institute of Banking
Personnel Selection, Mumbai with a copy among others to the Chairman,
Central Board
of Secondary Education, New Delhi.
4.
The Joint Secretary, UGC vide letter No.F.6-2/2013(SCT) dated
01.05.2013 has already advised to all the Registrar, Central/State &
Deemed to be universities
for strict compliance of the Office Memorandum No.16-11 0/2003-00.111
dated 26.02.2013.
{i,<IRJirJ"l~.
6.
~
~
~.
~
~-110001
/Sarojini
House,
6,
Bhagwan
Dass
Road,
New
Delhi
-110001
~/Tel.
23386054,
23386154
~/Fax
23386006
8.Hil%c/Website:
www.ccdisabilities.nic.in~/E-mail:
c...@nic.in
(CfC1<TI
,~
l'i
~
rf;~
~
~
/cfR:!
~
~
mI)
W.
(Please
quote
the
above
file/case
number
in
future
correspondence.)
Please
recycle
QS(j>
"
--'
5.
Section 59 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities,
Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 mandates the
Chief Commissioner
for persons with disabilities on his own motion or on application of
any aggrieved person or otherwise to look into the complaints
inter-alia, with respect
to matters relating to deprivation of rights of persons with disabilities.
6.
In the above view of the matter, it is advised to consider the request
made by the complainant and submit your comments to this Court within
30 days from
the date of receipt of this communication ensuring implementation the
Office Memorandum NO.16-110/2003-DD.111 dated 2602.2013 in the UGC-NET
Examinations
and no further violation of the guidelines for conducting written
examination for persons with disabilities. A copy of the reply be also
provided to the
complainant for submission of his rejoinder/comments within 15 days
from the date of receipt thereof.
Yours
faithfully,
\'
r
..
~\/
(
-/(
'f'
"'---"
l_'
.\\'ti-.~\~)._>
Encl:
As
above
(O.P.
Dogra)
Director
&
Oy.
Chief
Commissioner
Copy
to:
Shri
Avinash
Shahi,
For
information.
Ph.D.
Disability
Policy
Researcher
at
Centre
for
Law
and
Governance,
Room
No.223,
Second
Floor,
Periyar
Hostel,
Jawaharlal
Nehru
University,
New
Delhi
-110067
Email
-shahi88avin...@gmail.com
xNIRi1ll
~,
6,~
<m1xts,
~
~-110001
/Sarojini
House,
6,
Bhagwan
Dass
Road,
New
Delhi
-110001
~/Te1.:
23386054,
23386154
~/Fax:
23386006
~i'Hil~C';;Website:
www.ccdisabilities.nic.in~/E-mail:
c...@nic.in
(rrm
~
iT~
~
fm:;
~
~/~
xmm
~
fu"&1)
W
(Please
quote
the
above
file/case
number
in
future
correspondence.)
Please
recycle
~(9
On 7/2/15, avinash shahi <shahi88avin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Friends
> As a first procedural prerequisite, I've registered complaint against The
> UGC
> Interested candidates could also do the same to build pressure,then we
> will go to the High Court if need arises.
>
> To
> The
> Court of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
> Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment
> Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities
> Sarojini House, 6, Bhagwan Dass Road, New Delhi - 110 001
>
> Sub: Stern Action Sought Against The UGC for violating the Office
> Memorandum Issued by the Government of India for Conducting
> Examination for Persons with Disabilities
>
> Respected Hon’ble Court of The Chief Commissioner for Persons with
> Disabilities
> I am knocking at your door to apprise about the humiliation meted out
> to the candidates with disabilities in the recently held UGC NET exam
> on June 28 2015. The UGC imposed its arbitrary guidelines for the use
> of scribe which is in complete violation and contrary to the Office
> Memorandum issued by the government of India in February 2013. As
> aconsequence, scores of candidates with disabilities residing in the
> different states of India have expressed anger and narrated their
> ordeal on the social networking websites. Many were barred from
> appearing in the examination for frivolous reasons and were treated
> with contempt by the officials at the examination Centres. Some of the
> bitter experiences shared by the candidates are reproduced below for
> your kind perusal.
>
> Block quote
> Instead of verifying candidate-own scribe’s document on the date of
> examination, The CBSE imposed extra burden and asked blind candidates’
> to take permission one day prior to the exam. Now one could easily
> apply one’s common sense to comprehend the discrimination. When the
> all non-disabled aspirants were busy doing last-minute preparation,
> blind candidates struggled from pillar to post in reaching the
> different centres for availing permission to use writers. Most of them
> who are very poor, were forced to incur extra money unnecessairily
> Courtesy the CBSE.
> (Avinash Shahi Delhi).
> Block quote end
>
> Block quote
> My centre was at New Spot Public School in Vivek Vihaar. When I asked
> about scribe’s fee ,they told me that why did you use scribe when we
> provide braill question paper? I told them mam, yes you provide me
> question paper in braill but you remember that you didn't provide me
> answersheet in braill. She completely lost her point. Finally they
> didn’t give my scribe’s his fee.
> (Manish Jaiswal Delhi).
> Block quote end
>
> Block quote
> A visually impaired girl has been out rightly denied permission to
> take the exam at a center in Coimbatore, Tamilnadu. Ms.Barani, who has
> just passed out of her M.A in English from Pondicherry University,
> informed me the folowing yesterday: Those at the exam center in
> Coimbatore did not provide a scribe, and also denied entry to the
> scribe she took with her. They told her that she should have obtained
> permission for bringing her own scribe one week earlier. They also
> told her that even otherwise she should have informed the exam center
> one week earlier that she would not bring her own scribe and hence
> they themselves should (kindly) arrange one. Ultimately she was turned
> down even though she had brought a scribe with herself, and requested
> them to arrange anyone of their own choice.
> (Muruganandan Tamil Nadu).
> Block quote end
>
> The above personal narratives are just in no way could be construed as
> representational. Blind candidates in Odisha, UP, Bihar, MP and in the
> whole of north east who have no internet connectivity suffered the
> ill-treatment at the examination Centres. Below is relevant sections
> of the NET Notification for the Court’s perusal
> Block quote
> PROVISIONS FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITY (INCLUDING VISUALLY CHALLENGED
> CANDIDATES)
> i) Twenty five minutes compensatory time shall be provided for Paper –
> I and Paper – II separately. For paper – III, fifty minutes
> compensatory time shall
> be provided. These candidates, on their request, will also be provided
> the services of a scribe who would be a graduate in a subject other
> than that of
> the candidate. CBSE will also provide the Test Booklets of Paper-I,
> Paper–II & Paper–III in Braille in those subjects only which are
> printed in English
> or English and Hindi along with usual Test Booklets as provided to
> other candidates.
> ii) The Persons with Disability (Physically Challenged) candidates who
> are not in a position to write in their own hand-writing can also
> avail these services
> of scribe by making prior request (at least one week before the date
> of UGC-NET) in writing to the concerned Center Superintendent.
> Compensatory time and
> facility of scribe would not be provided to other Persons with
> Disability (Physically Challenged) candidates.
> iii) The candidate has the discretion of opting for his/her own scribe
> or has to request the concerned Center Superintendent for the same in
> writing at
> least one week in advance of the test. In such instances the candidate
> is allowed to meet the scribe a day before the examination so as to
> verify whether
> the scribe is suitable or not. Those candidates who opt for their own
> scribe have to produce the scribe before the concerned Center
> Superintendent along
> with his/her certificates of educational qualifications at least one
> day before the test. (See the full notification)
> http://cbsenet.nic.in/cbsenet/PDF/UGCNETbulletingJune2015.pdf
> Block quote end
>
> Above cited arbitrary provision imposed by UGC is contrary to the
> Office Memorandum of GOI which states
> Block quote
> I. Criteria like educational qualification, marks scored, age or other
> such restrictions for the scribe/reader/lab assistant should not be
> fixed. Instead, the invigilation system should be strengthened, so
> that the candidates using scribe/reader/lab assistant do not indulge
> in mal-practices like copying and cheating during the examination.
> Block quote end
>
> Respected Hon’ble Court, the above mentioned harsh narratives faced by
> disabled candidates are more than sufficient to reprimand UGC. And it
> is imperative for the Hon’ble Court to protect the rights of the
> disabled candidates to equal opportunity and safety against
> discrimination. Given the extent of mental trauma and raw treatment
> meted out to the disabled candidates; Court should take stern action
> against the UGC at the earliest. 1. The UGC should be directed to
> reconduct NET examination for those candidates who were arbitrarily
> denied to appear in the examination. 2. Hon’ble Court should ensure
> that the aforementioned Office Memorandum issued by the Government of
> India be enforced scrupulously in letter and spirit. I hope and trust
> that the Court would construe this case as suo-motive and initiate
> serious action as envisaged under Section 59 of the Persons with
> Disabilities Act 1995 forthwith.
>
> Complainant: Avinash Shahi
> Ph.D Disability Policy Researcher at Centre for Law and Governance
>
> Address
> Room no-223
> Second Floor
> Periyar Hostel
> Jawaharlal Nehru University
> New Delhi 110067
> Mobile: 9717230779
> E-mail: shahi88avin...@gmail.com
>
> --
> Avinash Shahi
> Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU
>
--
Avinash Shahi
Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU
Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of
mobile phones / Tabs on:
http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in
Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/
To unsubscribe send a message to
accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in
with the subject unsubscribe.
To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please
visit the list home page at
http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in
Disclaimer:
1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the
person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity;
2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent
through this mailing list..
