In a ruling delivered on September 25, 2026, the Delhi High Court ordered the State Bank of India (SBI) to allow a visually impaired candidate to take a recruitment exam using a scribe who has not passed Class X, overriding the Bank's own online portal requirement that the scribe produce a Class X certificate. The exam is scheduled for September 26.

The case, W.P.(C) 14285/2026, titled Sachin Kumar v. State Bank of India & Anr, was heard by Justice Prateek Jalan. The petitioner, Sachin Kumar, a person with disability (visual impairment – low vision), had applied for the post of Junior Associate, Customer Support and Sales. He wanted his younger brother to act as his scribe, but the Bank's candidate login panel required the scribe's SSC/10th Pass Board Certificate in PDF format. Since the brother had not yet passed Class X, the document could not be uploaded.

The Court's intervention came less than 24 hours before the exam. Justice Jalan, noting the urgency, requested the Bank's counsel, Mr. Akshit Kapur, to take instructions. The Bank's Deputy General Manager, Mr. Niraj Kumar, appeared via video conference. After taking instructions, the Bank conceded that the petitioner would be permitted to use the scribe even without a Class X certificate, and that the necessary formalities would be completed at the exam centre in Noida, Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner and his scribe must arrive at least one hour before the scheduled exam time. The scribe must carry a photograph, Aadhaar Card, and any school certificate or marksheet.

Sachin Kumar v. SBI: Why This Case Matters for Disabled Candidates

This ruling addresses a common but often overlooked barrier: administrative requirements that don't exist in the rules but are hardcoded into online forms. The petitioner's counsel, Mr. Ankur Ahlawat, argued that no such qualification for a scribe is mentioned in the Bank's guidelines or rules. The portal, however, made it impossible to proceed without uploading the certificate. For a candidate with low vision, a scribe is not a convenience; it is the only way to write the exam. Without the scribe, the candidate cannot compete.

The Court's order does not strike down the Bank's scribe policy or declare it illegal. Instead, it provides immediate relief by directing the Bank to accept alternative documents and verify them at the exam centre. This is a practical solution that balances the candidate's right to participate with the Bank's need to prevent fraud.

The case also raises a question about how disability accommodations are implemented. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, mandates reasonable accommodations, including scribes for candidates with visual impairment. But when the implementing agency, like SBI, imposes additional documentary requirements that effectively exclude some candidates, the promise of the law is undermined. The Delhi High Court's intervention ensures that the petitioner's exam attempt is not derailed by a portal glitch.

What the Delhi High Court Ordered

The Court recorded the Bank's statement that the petitioner will be allowed to take the exam with his younger brother as scribe, despite the lack of a Class X certificate. The formalities will be completed at the centre. The Court also noted that if any document or declaration given by the petitioner or his scribe is found to be false, the Bank may take consequential action as permissible in law. The writ petition and pending application were disposed of in these terms.

The order does not set a precedent for future cases, but it sends a clear message: administrative technicalities cannot defeat a candidate's right to take an exam for which they are otherwise eligible. It also highlights the need for banks and other public institutions to align their online systems with the legal requirements of the RPwD Act.

Justice Jalan's order is brief but significant. It prevents a situation where a qualified candidate would miss an exam because of a document requirement that the Bank itself does not enforce in its rules. The petitioner will now be able to appear for the exam with his chosen scribe, subject to verification.

This ruling is particularly relevant as India's public sector banks conduct large-scale recruitment drives. Candidates with disabilities often face hurdles in accessing scribes, and courts have repeatedly had to intervene. In this case, the Delhi High Court acted swiftly, ensuring that the exam proceeds fairly. The Bank's willingness to accommodate the petitioner also shows that institutions can resolve such issues without protracted litigation, when approached by the court.

For Sachin Kumar, the order means a fair shot at a job. For other disabled candidates, it is a reminder that courts can be a safety net when rules and reality collide. The exam is on September 26, and the scribe will be waiting with his Aadhaar card and photograph. The rest is up to the candidate.

Disclaimer: This analysis is based solely on the text of the Delhi High Court order dated September 25, 2026. No other sources were used.