Supreme Court Allows Candidates With Learning Disability and Mental Illness To Join CAG Auditor Post

The Supreme Court has ruled in Sudhanshu Kardam v. Comptroller and Auditor General of India and Ors., holding that candidates with benchmark disabilities cannot be denied government appointments based on outdated classifications of posts.

The decision clarifies that authorities must apply the latest notifications issued under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 while determining eligibility for posts reserved for persons with disabilities.

The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta on March 12.

The Court directed authorities to consider the appointment of candidates who were earlier denied selection for the post of Auditor in the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

Background of the dispute

The matter arose from recruitment conducted by the Staff Selection Commission through the Combined Graduate Level Examination in 2018 for the post of Auditor in the CAG office.

Two candidates, Sudhanshu Kardam and Amit Yadav, had qualified in the examination but were denied appointment. Authorities relied on a 2013 list identifying posts suitable for persons with benchmark disabilities.

That earlier list did not recognise candidates with mental illness or Specific Learning Disability (SLD) as eligible for the Auditor post.

The candidates challenged the rejection, arguing that a later notification had expanded the categories of disabilities eligible for certain posts.

2021 notification expands eligibility

During the proceedings, the Court examined a Gazette Notification issued on January 4, 2021 by the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act.

This notification replaced the earlier 2013 list and broadened the categories of disabilities eligible for reservation in several Group ‘C’ posts.

Importantly, it identified positions such as Assistant (Audit) and Auditor-II as suitable for persons with benchmark disabilities, including individuals with mental illness and specific learning disabilities.

Court’s observations

The Supreme Court noted that authorities cannot rely on outdated classifications once a new notification has come into force.

The bench observed that the High Court had erred in overlooking the 2021 notification while dealing with the issue.

The Court also took note of an additional affidavit filed by the CAG acknowledging that the updated notification indeed recognised the relevant posts as suitable for candidates with the disabilities in question.

Directions issued by the Court

In its order, the Court directed the Staff Selection Commission to forward the dossiers of the two candidates to the CAG within two weeks.

The CAG was instructed to consider their appointment against appropriate Group ‘C’ posts in accordance with the 2021 notification.

The Court further clarified that if the vacancies advertised in the 2018 recruitment process have already been filled, the authorities must create supernumerary posts to accommodate the candidates.

The ruling reinforces the objective of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act to ensure equal opportunities in public employment and emphasises that administrative authorities must follow the latest legal framework governing disability reservations.

Case: Sudhanshu Kardam v. Comptroller and Auditor General of India and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 237