1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 292 OF 2006

DISABLED RIGHTS GROUP & ANR. .....PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S)

W I T H

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 997 OF 2013

J U D G M E N T

A.K. SIKRI, J.

Three issues are raised in this petition which is filed in public

interest, for the benefit of persons suffering from ‘disabililty’ as per the

definition contained in the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities,

Protection of Rights and Full Participation Act) 1995 (hereinafter referred

to as the ‘Disabilities Act, 1995’) which now stands repealed and is

replaced by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (hereinafter

referred to as the ‘Disabilities Act, 2016’). The first issue related to the

2

non-implementation of 3% reservation of seats in educational institutions

as provided in Section 39 of the Disabilities Act, 1995 and Section 32 of

the Disabilities Act, 2016. Second equally important issue raised in this

petition, which is intimately connected with the first issue, is to provide

proper access to orthopaedic disabled persons so that they are able to

freely move in the educational institution and access the facilities. Third

issue pertains to pedagogy i.e. making adequate provisions and facilities

of teaching for disabled persons, depending upon the nature of their

disability, to enable them to undertake their studies effectively.

We may state at the outset that though the petition as originally

filed had confined these issues only to law colleges. In view of the fact

that these issues are of seminal importance, this Court decided to

extend the coverage by encompassing all educational institutions.

2)As can be discerned from the number assigned to this writ petition, it

was filed in the year 2006 and, thus, is pending for eleven years. The

reason was that this Court has been calling for the status report(s) from

the respondents/Government Authorities from time to time about the

implementation of the Disabilities Act insofar as provisions relating to the

aforesaid aspects are concerned. Since the matter was ripe for passing

final orders and directions, we deemed it proper to hear the counsel for

the parties at length so that the writ petition is disposed of by giving final

directions in this behalf.

3

(I)Re: 3% Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions

3)Section 39 of the Disabilities Act, 1995 reads as under:

“Section 39 : All Government educational institutions and

other educational institutions receiving aid from the

Government, shall reserve not less than three per cent

seat for persons with disabilities.”

4)As per this provision, all Government educational institutions as well as

other educational institutions which are receiving aid from the

Government are supposed to reserve seats for the benefit of persons

with disabilities, which reservation shall not be less than 3%. Thus, 3%

of the seats is the minimum reservation and it can be even more than

3%. This provision had come up for discussion before this Court in All

Kerala Parents Association of the Hearing Impaired v. State of

Kerala

1

and the Court issued following directions therein:

“We...hold that Section 39 deals with the reservation of

seats for persons with disabilities in government

educational institutions as well as educational institutions

receiving aid from the government, and necessarily

therefore the provison thereof must be complied with.”

5)Disabilities Act, 2016 makes more exhaustive provisions insofar as

providing of educational facilities to the persons with disabilities is

concerned. Section 31 confers right to free education upon children with

benchmark disabilities who are between the age of 6 to 18 years. This

provision is made notwithstanding anything contained in the Rights of

1 2002 (7) Scale 198

4

Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. Section 32

makes provisions for reservation in higher educational institutions.

Section 34 provides for reservation in employment. Since, we are

concerned with reservation of seats in educational institutions and as

Section 32 directly deals with the same, we reproduce that provision

hereunder:

“32. (1) All Government institutions of higher education

and other higher education institutions receiving aid from

the Government shall reserve not less than five per cent.

seats for persons with benchmark disabilities.

(2) The persons with benchmark disabilities shall be given

an upper age relaxation of five years for admission in

institutions of higher education.”

6)The educational institutions covered by this provision are not only the

Government institutions of higher education but all those higher

education institutions which are receiving aid from the Government.

Other pertinent aspect is that the extent of reservation is increased from

3% under Disabilities Act, 1995 to 5% under this Disabilities Act, 2016.

One more important improvement made in Disabilities Act, 2016 over

the earlier Act is that such provisions are made for ‘persons with bench

mark disabilities’. This expression is defined in Section 2(r) which reads

as under:

“Section 2(r) “person with benchmark disability” means a

person with not less than forty per cent. of a specified

disability where specified disability has not been defined

in measurable terms and includes a person with disability

where specified disability has been defined in measurable

5

terms, as certified by the certifying authority.”

7)It, thus, hardly needs to be emphasised that such educational institutions

are bound to reserve seats from persons suffering from disability.

Notwithstanding the same, grievance of the petitioner is that the

educational institutions have not been adhering thereto.

8)No doubt, some progress is made in this behalf after the filing of this

present petition and monitoring of the case by this Court, there is a need

for complying with this provision to full extent. Accordingly, we direct

that all those institutions which are covered by the obligations provided

under Section 32 of the Disabilities Act, 2016 shall comply with the

provisions of Section 32 while making admission of students in

educational courses of higher education each year. To this end, they

shall submit list of the number of disabled persons admitted in each

course every year to the Chief Commissioner and/or the State

Commissioner (as the case may be). It will also be the duty of the Chief

Commissioner as well as the State Commissioner to enquire as to

whether these educational institutions have fulfilled the aforesaid

obligation. Needless to mention, appropriate consequential action

against those educational institutions, as provided under Section 89 of

the Disabilities Act, 2016 as well as other provisions, shall be initiated

against defaulting institutions.

6

(II) & (III)Re: Provision for accessibility as well as facilities

9)In another judgment pronounced today itself in the case of Rajive

Raturi v. Union of India & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 243 of 2005 with Anr.),

this very Bench has given detailed directions for making appropriate

provisions for accessibility of handicapped persons, though the scope of

that petition was confined to persons suffering from visual impairment.

However, various aspects discussed and directions given for making

suitable provisions in this behalf would benefit persons suffering from

other disabilities as well. Therefore, the position of law discussed in

detail in the said judgment and the directions issued therein need not be

repeated for the sake of brevity. We would, however, recapitulate

following provisions contained in Disabilities Act, 2016:

Section 2(i) - ‘establishment includes a Government establishment and

private establishment”

Section 2(k) - ‘Government establishment’ means a corporation

established by or under a Central Act or State Act or an authority or a

body owned or controlled or aided by the Government or a local

authority or a Government company as defined in section 2 of the

Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013) and includes a Department of the

Government.

7

Section 2(v) - “private establishment” means a company, firm,

cooperative or other society, associations, trust, agency, institution,

organisation, union, factory or such other establishment as the

appropriate Government may, by notification, specify; (w) “public

building” means a Government or private building, used or accessed by

the public at large, including a building used for educational or vocational

purposes, workplace, commercial activities, public utilities, religious,

cultural, leisure or recreational activities, medical or health services, law

enforcement agencies, reformatories or judicial foras, railway stations or

platforms, roadways bus stands or terminus, airports or waterways;

Section 2(w) - “public building” means a Government or private building,

used or accessed by the public at large, including a building used for

educational or vocational purposes, workplace, commercial activities,

public utilities, religious, cultural, leisure or recreational activities,

medical or health services, law enforcement agencies, reformatories or

judicial foras, railway stations or platforms, roadways bus stands or

terminus, airports or waterways;

Section 2(zd) - “transportation systems” includes road transport, rail

transport, air transport, water transport, para transit systems for the last

mile connectivity, road and street infrastructure, etc;

8

Section 2(ze) - “universal design” means the design of products,

environments, programmes and services to be usable by all people to

the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or

specialised design and shall apply to assistive devices including

advanced technologies for particular group of persons with disabilities.

Section 2(b) - “appropriate Government” means,—

(i) in relation to the Central Government or any establishment wholly or

substantially financed by that Government, or a Cantonment Board

constituted under the Cantonments Act, 2006 (41 of 2006), the Central

Government;

(ii) in relation to a State Government or any establishment, wholly or

substantially financed by that Government, or any local authority, other

than a Cantonment Board, the State Government.

Section 16 mandates the appropriate Government and the local

authorities to endeavour that all educational institutions funded or

recognised by them provide inclusive education to the children with

disabilities and towards that end shall make buildings, campus and

various facilities accessible.

Section 25(1)(b) mandates the appropriate Government and local

authority to take necessary measures for the persons with disabilities to

9

provide barrier-free access in all parts of Government and private

hospitals and other health care institutions and centres.

Section 40 mandates the Central Government to frame Rules and laying

down the standards of accessibility for physical environment,

transportation system, information & communication system and other

facilities & services to be provided to the public in urban and rural areas.

Rule 15 deals with accessibility standards for public buildings, passenger

bus transport and information and communication technology. As

regards public buildings, the accessibility standards prescribed under the

Harmonised Guidelines and Space Standards for barrier-free built

environment for persons with disabilities and elderly persons issued by

Ministry of Urban Development have been adopted. This implies that all

the public buildings are now required to conform to these standards.

10) It hardly needs to be emphasised that Disabilities Act is premised

on the fundamental idea that society creates the barriers and oppressive

structures which impede the capacities of person with disabilities.

Capability theorists like Martha Nussbaum are of the opinion that there

cannot be a different set of capacities or a different threshold of

capabilities for persons with disabilities. This raises the critical issue of

creating a level playing field whereby all citizens to have equality of fair

opportunities to enable them to realise their full potential and experience

10

well-being. To ensure the level playing field, it is not only essential to

give necessary education to the persons suffering from the disability, it is

also imperative to see that such education is imparted to them in a

fruitful manner. That can be achieved only if there is proper accessibility

to the buildings where the educational institution is housed as well as to

other facilities in the said building, namely, class rooms, library,

bathrooms etc. Without that physically handicapped persons would not

be able to avail and utilise the educational opportunity in full measure.

11) Various theories on different models of disability have emerged,

namely, the Social Model of Disability, the Medical Model of Disability,

the Rights Base Model of Disability, the Model of Ethical and

Philosophical Status, the Economic Model of Disability etc

2

. It is not

necessary to delve into these different models of disabilities. However,

for the purpose of the present case, some comments are required on the

Social Model of Disability. The Social Model of Disability locates

disability as being socially constructed through the creation of artificial

attitudinal, organisational and environmental barriers. Impairment is

regarded as being a normal part of the human condition, with everyone

experiencing impairment differently and having different access needs.

Life is accepted as including negative experiences, and impairment may

2 For detailed discussion, see Theoretizing the Models of Disability Philosophical

Social and Medical Concepts-An Empirical Research based on existing Literature by Shanimon. S.

and Rateesh. K. Nair

11

be - but is not necessarily - one of them. Disabled people are defined as

being people who experience the unnecessary barriers created by

society within their daily life. Social Model of disability has gained ground

in the international debate. This views disability as a social construct and

emphasizes society's shortcomings, stigmatization and discrimination in

its reaction to persons with disability. It distinguishes between functional

impairments (disability) both of a physical and psychological nature, and

the loss of equal participation in social processes that only arises

through interaction with the social setting (handicap). These

developments have contributed to a new (WHO) model, which bears in

mind social as well as functional and individual factors in its

classification of health and health-related areas. Keeping in view the

above, proper facilities are need to be provided to differently-abled

persons while having higher education.

12) Insofar as the rights base approach is concerned, that has been

narrated in detail in Rajive Raturi’s judgment. We may add that a basic

underline assumption, which is well recognised, is that everyone can

learn; there is no such person as one who is ineducable; and that,

accordingly, all disabled persons (from whatever disability they are

suffering) have right to get not only minimum education but higher

education as well. Not making adequate provisions to facilitate proper

education to such persons, therefore, would amount to discrimination.

12

Such requirement is to ensure that even a student with disability, after

proper education, will be able to lead an independent, economically self

sufficient, productive and fully participatory life. This rights-based

approach is an inclusive approach which class for the participation of all

groups of the population, including disadvantaged persons, in the

development process. Inclusive development builds on the idea of

‘Society for All’ in which all people are equally free to develop their

potential, contribute their skills and abilities for the common good and to

take up their entitlements to social services. It emphasises

strengthening the rights of the people with disabilities, and foster their

participation in all aspects of life. A disability is only actually a disability

when it prevents someone from doing what they want or need to do. A

lawyer can be just as effective in a wheelchair, as long as she has

access to the courtroom and the legal library, as well as to whatever

other places and material or equipment that are necessary for her to do

her job well. A person who can’t hear can be a master carpenter or the

head of a chemistry lab, if he can communicate with clients and

assistants. A person with mental illness can nonetheless be a brilliant

scholar or theorist

3

. The aforesaid discussion amply justifies right of

access to students with disabilities to educational institutions in which

they are admitted.

3 We have a celebrated examples of John Nash, a noted mathematician who earned

laurels by getting noble prize and Stephen Hawkins.

13

13) It would be pertinent to mention at this stage that in the guidelines

for development grant to colleges framed by the University Grants

Commission (UGC), the UGC has specifically made provisions

concerning ‘schemes for persons with disabilities’. There is a specific

scheme in respect of Higher Education for Persons with Special Needs

(HEPSN). This HEPSN scheme has three components, namely,

(i)Establishment of Enabling Units for differently-abled persons. The

function of this unit as enumerated therein includes creating

awareness about the needs of differently-abled persons, and other

general issues concerning their learning. This special unit is to be

guaranteed by a faculty member to be nominated by the Head of

the Institution.

(ii)Component 2 of the scheme deals with providing access to

differently-abled persons. For this purpose, UGC agreed to make

a one-time grant of up to Rs.5 lakhs per college during the Plan

period. To enable these institutions to make special arrangements

in the environment for their mobility and independent functioning

and to ensure that all existing structures as well as future

construction projects in their campuses are made disabled friendly.

(iii)Third component deals with providing special equipment to

14

augment educational services for differently-abled persons. It

recognises that differently-abled persons require special aids and

appliances for their daily functioning and that the higher

educational institutes may need special learning and assessment

devices in this behalf. In addition, visually challenged students

need Readers. Thus, colleges are encourage to procure such

devices such as computers with screen reading software,

low-vision aids, scanners, mobility devices etc.

14) The petitioner had filed a compilation on February 22, 2016

containing suggestions, in the form of Guidelines, insofar as making

adequate infrastructure for providing proper access and also teaching

facilities (Pedagogy) for differently-abled persons are concerned:

(I)INFRASTRUCTURE

(a)University/College Campus

Barrier-free campus environment according to the provisions of

Section 45 and Section 46 of the Persons with Disability Act, 1995 and

further according to 2001 guidelines issued by the Chief Commissioner

for Persons with Disabilities entitled “Planning a Barrier Free

Environment”. Some specific examples – where a building is of more

than 2 storeys, mandatory provision for lifts. Straight and barrier-free

paths, removal of obstacles such as plants, furniture or bicycles adjacent

15

to doors, entrances, on the steps or in corridors. Unnecessary interior

decoration of areas should be avoided where the same leads to

impairment of the mobility of disabled persons.

(b)On Campus Accommodation

Priority assignment of on-campus/college hostel accommodation.

Rooms assigned preferably on the ground floor. Suitable room and

bathroom modifications in hostel such as provision of ramps and special

fittings/adjustable furniture to facilitate mobility and comfort. Availability

of attendant/helper/ assistant, as required, to help the disabled student

with mobility and orientation in hostel. Special on-campus transportation

on as-needed basis. Where no on-campus accommodation is provided,

scheme for financial assistance to the disabled student for expenses for

off-campus accommodation and related requirements such as

helper/attendant, transport to/from campus, etc.

(c)Classroom

For visually impaired – Braille symbols at appropriate places in

classroom buildings to assist with orientation. Auditory signals in

elevators and lifts leading to classrooms. For students with low vision,

adequate lighting in the classroom via natural light or adequate provision

of bulbs, tube lights, etc. Provision for recording of lectures. Power

plug points for visually impaired students to fit in their aids and

16

appliances such as audio recorder, laptop, computer etc. Classroom

acoustics to be designed so that all audio communication is clearly

audible.

For orthopaedic impaired – Classrooms in locations accessible

to wheelchair users. Ramps in classroom buildings and adaptations in

toilets for wheelchair users and orthopaedic disabled persons. Seating

priority in classrooms with adequate space for wheelchair users to move

around. Avoidance of teaching platforms as being difficult to access for

orthopaedic impaired persons.

For hearing impaired – Clear and prominent signs indicating

locations of courses and classrooms to assist with orientation. Seating

for the hearing impaired student as well as a note-taker, located such

that lip movement of instructor and sign language interpreter can easily

be seen.

(d)Science Laboratories

Structure and layout modifications of the laboratories for safety

and comfort of the visually impaired and orthopaedic

impaired/wheelchair users. Use of Braille instruction sheets and tactile

visual material. Availability of assistants for help with laboratory

activities, particularly where some risk is involved, such as handling of

chemicals. Sigh language interpreters for hearing impaired.

17

(e)Libraries

For visually impaired students, Braille section and fully accessible

computer systems with scanning facilities, JAWS software and Braille

embossers for printing. For low vision students, large print books and

computers equipped with text enlarging software. Digital libraries.

Library cataloguing on computer with JAWS. Sign language interpreters

as required for hearing impaired.

(f)Pedagogy (Teaching)

For visually impaired – Course material in accessible formats

such as Braille, audio books and electronic formats such as e-files in

‘daisy’ format. Availability of readers, note takers, scribes. Suitable

curriculum modification and assistance esp. for

scientific/pictorial/graphical material and science laboratories.

Computers with screen reading software, accessible library and

reference materials. Availability of tape recorders/ digital voice

recorders.

For orthopaedic impaired – Note takers and scribes, as required,

especially for persons with upper limb impairment. Suitable curriculum

modification and assistance, especially in science laboratories.

18

For hearing impaired – Note takers for classroom and provision

of laptop/computer for note taking. Sign language interpreters for

communication support in seminars, meetings, discussions and at all

university/college functions. Suitable curriculum modification and

assistance for science laboratories. Sub-titling of classroom video

material. Technological support for any other necessary and appropriate

technology, including computer technology, to assist the hearing

impaired student with learning.

(g)Examination and Testing Modifications

Extension of time, use of reader/scribe, use of computer/laptop.

Availability of question papers in accessible formats, including large

print, Braille, audio, daisy format. Option of writing exams on computer

with screen reading software. Modification of pictorial and graphical

material for visually impaired.

(h)University/College Administration

Scribes, helpers and sign language interpreters for disabled

students in interactions with university/college administration, especially

for the admission process, meetings with staff/principal, on-campus

company recruitment interviews and communication with college officials

such as career counsellors, student counsellors, psychologists and any

other person attached to the university/college who provides services of

19

any type to the students. Special admissions window for disabled

students. Sensitivity training on disability to administrative and

pedagogic staff.

(i)Sports, Culture, Recreation and Leisure Facilities

Universities/colleges to ensure that cultural/recreational programs

take into account need of students with disabilities to provide for their full

participation in such programs. Some specific examples in sports:

running courses/tracks to be straight where visually impaired and

orthopaedic impaired students are participating. Special sporting events

to be conducted such as cricket for visually impaired and special events

according to para-olympic norms for orthopaedic impaired. International

norms to be modified where necessary to suit the needs of the disabled

students. Trainers to be sensitized towards disability and inclusion and

respective societies/associations to ensure that the information about

events/contests reaches the disabled students also. Similarly, cultural

activities with adequate modifications to be made available. For

example, disabled students to be enabled to take part in theatre, literary,

dance and music activities with the help of assistants. Hearing impaired

students to be provided with an interpreter for sports and cultural

activities of various types.

15) Based on the aforesaid suggestions, the petitioner made written

20

submissions on February 22, 2016, seeking following directions:

“(a) For an order directing the UGC to carry out an

inspection of the 3% reservation record of respondent

Nos. 11, 12 and 13 to ensure that 3% reservation for

persons with disabilities are complied with, including the

backlog.

(b) For an order directing the UGC to inspect all

institutions of higher education to ensure that these

institutions are made disabled friendly and make a report

to the Central Executive Committee and the State

Executive Committees who will, in turn, ensure that the

institutions are made disabled friendly.

(c) For an order directing the UGC to consider the

“Guidelines for Accessibility for Students with Disabilities

in Universities/Colleges” submitted by the petitioner

pursuant to the order of this Court dated December 09,

2010 and after making such changes as deemed fit, to

issue directions to all institutions of higher education,

including law colleges, for compliance within a specified

period.”

16) After coming into force the Disabilities Act, 2016, further directions

are sought in tune with the provisions contained in the said Act, in the

following manner:

“(d) For an order directing the Central Government

under Section 40 of the Disabilities Act, 2016 to frame

the rules for persons with disabilities laying down the

standards of accessibility for colleges, universities and

other higher educational institutions, including

pedagogical measures such as reasonable

accommodation, modifications and aids and appliances

for lectures, curricula, teaching materials, laboratories,

libraries, examinations, classrooms and hostels etc.

within six months from today; and for a direction to the

appropriate Governments to implement the said rules

within two years from the notification of the said Rules in

accordance with Section 46.

(e) For an order directing the Central Government to

take into consideration the Guidelines for Accessibility for

21

Students with Disabilities in Universities/Colleges, as

submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with this

Court’s order dated January 20, 2011, while framing the

Rules under Section 40 of the Act.

(f) For an order directing the Central Government to

create an audit template in conformity with the Rules for

accessibility in higher educational institutions referred to

in (m) above, and for a direction to the appropriate

Governments (Central and State Governments, UGC,

BCI) to conduct an audit of all higher educational

institutions within six months from today and to put all the

audit reports on a website.

(g) For an order directing the UGC, the Central and the

State Governments to invite applications from higher

educational institutions for funding under the various

schemes for accessibility and to release funds in

accordance thereof to facilitate accessibility measures in

the educational institutions.

(h) For an order directing all higher educational

institutions to make their institutions accessible in

accordance with the Act and the Rules within two years

of the notification of the rules; and for mandatory

formation in each institution of the Enabling Unit for

disabled students as per UGC scheme ‘HEPSN’ to

ensure monitoring and implementation of the standards

and guidelines contained in the Rules.

(i) For an order directing the Central and State Advisory

Boards to monitor the implementation of the Act and

Rules and the orders of this Court to ensure compliance.”

17) There cannot be any dispute that the suggestions given by the

petitioner, which are reproduced above, appear to be reasonable and

are worthy of implementation. However, at the same time, it would be

appropriate to consider the feasibility thereof particularly with regard to

the manner in which these can be implemented. This task can be

undertaken by the UGC. Likewise, the directions which are sought by

the petitioners are in consonance with the provisions contained in the

22

Disabilities Act, 2016. In these circumstances, we dispose of these writ

petitions with the following directions:

(i)While dealing with the issue of reservation of seats in the

educational institutions, we have already given directions in para 8

above that the provisions of Section 32 of the Disabilities Act, 2016 shall

be complied with by all concerned educational institutions. In addition to

the directions mentioned therein, we also direct that insofar as law

colleges are concerned, intimation in this behalf shall be sent by those

institutions to the Bar Council of India (BCI) as well. Other educational

institutions will notify the compliance, each year, to the UGC. It will be

within the discretion of the BCI and/or UGC to carry out inspections of

such educational institutions to verify as to whether the provisions are

complied with or not.

(ii)Insofar as suggestions given by the petitioner in the form of

“Guidelines for Accessibility for Students with Disabilities in

Universities/Colleges” are concerned, the UGC shall consider the

feasibility thereof by constituting a Committee in this behalf. In this

Committee, the UGC would be free to include persons from amongst

Central Advisory Board, State Advisory Boards, Chief Commissioner of

State Commissioners appointed under the Disabilities Act. This

Committee shall undertake a detailed study for making provisions in

23

respect of accessibility as well as pedagogy and would also suggest the

modalities for implementing those suggestions, their funding and

monitoring, etc. The Committee shall also lay down the time limits within

which such suggestions could be implemented. The Expert Committee

may also consider feasibility of constituting an in-house body in each

educational institution (of teachers, staff, students and parents) for

taking care of day to day needs of differently abled persons as well as

for implementation of the Schemes that would be devised by the Expert

Committee. This exercise shall be completed by June 30, 2018.

(iii)Report in this behalf, as well as the Action Taken Report, shall be

submitted to this Court in July, 2018. On receipt of the report, the matter

shall be placed before the Court.

.............................................J.

(A.K. SIKRI)

.............................................J.

(ASHOK BHUSHAN)

NEW DELHI;

DECEMBER 15, 2017

24

ITEM NO.1502 COURT NO.6 SECTION X

(FOR JUDGMENT)

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 292/2006

DISABLED RIGHT GROUP & ANR. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)

([HEARD BY : HON. A.K. SIKRI AND HON. ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.])

WITH

W.P.(C) No. 997/2013 (X)

Date : 15-12-2017 These petitions were called on for pronouncement

of judgment today.

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Baijnath Patatel, Adv.

Ms. Sweta, Adv.

Ms. Romila, Adv.

Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR

Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, AOR

For Respondent(s)

Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, AOR

Ms. Charu Mathur, AOR

Mr. G. N. Reddy, AOR

Mr. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, AOR

Ms. Sushma Suri, AOR

Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR

Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri pronounced the judgment of the

Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok

Bhushan.

The writ petitions are disposed of with the following

directions:

25

(i)While dealing with the issue of reservation of seats in

the educational institutions, we have already given directions

in para 8 above that the provisions of Section 32 of the

Disabilities Act, 2016 shall be complied with by all concerned

educational institutions. In addition to the directions

mentioned therein, we also direct that insofar as law colleges

are concerned, intimation in this behalf shall be sent by

those institutions to the Bar Council of India (BCI) as well.

Other educational institutions will notify the compliance,

each year, to the UGC. It will be within the discretion of

the BCI and/or UGC to carry out inspections of such

educational institutions to verify as to whether the

provisions are complied with or not.

(ii)Insofar as suggestions given by the petitioner in the

form of “Guidelines for Accessibility for Students with

Disabilities in Universities/Colleges” are concerned, the UGC

shall consider the feasibility thereof by constituting a

Committee in this behalf. In this Committee, the UGC would be

free to include persons from amongst Central Advisory Board,

State Advisory Boards, Chief Commissioner of State

Commissioners appointed under the Disabilities Act. This

Committee shall undertake a detailed study for making

provisions in respect of accessibility as well as pedagogy and

would also suggest the modalities for implementing those

suggestions, their funding and monitoring, etc. The Committee

shall also lay down the time limits within which such

26

suggestions could be implemented. The Expert Committee may

also consider feasibility of constituting an in-house body in

each educational institution (of teachers, staff, students and

parents) for taking care of day to day needs of differently

abled persons as well as for implementation of the Schemes

that would be devised by the Expert Committee. This exercise

shall be completed by June 30, 2018.

(iii) Report in this behalf, as well as the Action Taken

Report, shall be submitted to this Court in July, 2018. On

receipt of the report, the matter shall be placed before the

Court.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of

accordingly.

(Ashwani Thakur) (Mala Kumari Sharma)

COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

(Signed reportable judgment is placed on the file)