This article is based on the Editorial "We need accessibility rules that are based on principles " that appeared in The Hindu on - January 10, 2025.

Context

The Supreme Court, in Rajive Raturi v. Union of India (2024), held that Rule 15 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Rules, 2017, violated the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

BACKGROUND: ALL ABOUT RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (RPWD) ACT 2017

The Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act was enacted in 2016 and came into force on 19th April 2017. It replaced the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, with the objective of ensuring persons with disabilities can live with dignity, without discrimination and with equal opportunities. It aligns with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

Key Provisions and Rights

Provision	Key Points
Equality, Dignity, and Integrity	Section 3(1): Ensures equality, dignity, and respect for persons with disabilities, promoting parity.
Rights of Women and Children	Section 4: Mandates government to safeguard the rights of women and children with disabilities.
Community Living	Section 5(2): Advocates for access to community services and prohibits forced living arrangements.
Protection from Cruel Treatment	Section 6: Protects from torture or inhuman treatment; mandates informed consent for research.
Protection from Abuse	Section 7: Ensures measures to rescue, protect, and rehabilitate victims of abuse or exploitation.
Safety in Emergencies	Section 8: Includes persons with disabilities in disaster management for safety and protection.
Family Rights for Disabled Children	Section 9: Prevents separation from parents except by court order.
Reproductive Rights	Section 10: Guarantees access to reproductive information; bans forced infertility procedures.
Accessibility in Voting	Section 11: Ensures polling stations and materials are accessible.
Access to Justice	Section 12: Provides for non-discriminatory access to courts and legal services in accessible formats.
Legal Rights	Section 13: Upholds equal legal rights and recognition before the law.
Appointment of Limited Guardian	Section 14: Allows limited guardianship to aid in legally binding decisions when necessary.
High Support Needs	Section 15: Mandates support for persons with high needs and institutionalized individuals.

Educational Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Inclusive Education in Schools

Section 16 of the RPwD Act mandates that all educational institutions funded or recognized by the government provide inclusive education to children with disabilities. This includes ensuring accessibility and support in various forms. Mainstream schools must provide inclusive education by ensuring accessibility, equal opportunities, individualized support, early intervention and necessary accommodations for students with disabilities.

Government Measures for Inclusive Education

Section 17 of the Act outlines several measures the government must take:

To support inclusive education, a survey must be conducted every five years to identify the needs of children with disabilities. Teacher training institutions should be established and trained educators proficient in Braille and sign language employed. Professionals must be trained to support inclusion and resource centers set up to assist schools. The use of alternative communication methods like Braille and sign language should be promoted, while providing free assistive devices and learning materials for students with disabilities up to 18 years. Scholarships, curriculum modifications, examination accommodations and research to enhance learning for persons with disabilities are essential steps.

Provisions for Skill Development and Employment

Government Schemes for Skill Development

Section 19 of the RPwD Act mandates the government to create schemes for the skill development and employment of persons with disabilities, focusing on vocational training and self-employment. Key provisions include:

Promote skill development for persons with disabilities through inclusive vocational programs, exclusive training, market linkage, concessional loans and product marketing support.

Protection Against Discrimination in Employment

Section 20 of the Act ensures that no government establishment discriminates against persons with disabilities in employment matters. It also prohibits denying promotions on the grounds of disability.

Rights of Persons with Benchmark Disabilities

Definition and Disabilities

A person with benchmark disability refers to someone with a disability of at least 40% as certified by a competent authority. The Act covers disabilities including:

• Physical disabilities: Locomotor disability, blindness, low vision, hearing impairments, speech and language disability.
• Intellectual disabilities: Autism, specific learning disabilities.
• Mental behavior: Mental illness.
• Chronic neurological conditions: Multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease.
• Blood disorders: Haemophilia, thalassemia, sickle cell disease.
• Multiple disabilities.

Educational Rights and Reservation

• Free education: Children with benchmark disabilities between 6-18 years have the right to free education in neighbourhood or special schools of their choice (Section 31).
• Higher education reservation: Government-funded institutions must reserve at least 5% seats for persons with benchmark disabilities and provide a five-year upper-age relaxation for admissions (Section 32).

Job Identification and Reservation in Government Employment

• The government is responsible for identifying suitable posts for persons with benchmark disabilities (Section 33).
• Government establishments must reserve at least 4% of vacancies for persons with benchmark disabilities, with specific quotas for different categories (Section 34).
• Age relaxation: The government may provide relaxation in the upper age limit for employment in the government sector (Section 34).
• Private sector employment: Section 35 encourages private sector employers to hire at least 5% of their workforce from persons with benchmark disabilities, offering incentives.

Reservation in Development Schemes

• 5% reservation is provided for persons with benchmark disabilities in poverty alleviation programs, land allotment for housing and various development schemes, with priority given to women with benchmark disabilities.
• Priority is also given in land allotment for setting up businesses, enterprises and recreational centers.

Other Provisions under the Act for Persons with Disabilities

Special Provisions for Persons with Disabilities with High Support Needs

Section 38 provides that individuals with benchmark disabilities who require high support can apply to an authority, to be notified by the government, for necessary assistance.

Ensuring Adequate Standard of Living

Section 24 mandates the government to formulate schemes to ensure persons with disabilities can live independently or within the community. These schemes must provide at least 25% higher assistance compared to similar schemes for others.

Healthcare Facilities

• Section 25 ensures barrier-free access in government and private healthcare institutions.
• Priority treatment and free healthcare (subject to income criteria) will be available, particularly in rural areas.

Social Audits of Schemes

Section 48 requires the appropriate government to conduct social audits of all general schemes involving persons with disabilities to ensure they meet their needs and do not cause adverse effects.

Insurance Schemes for Employees with Disabilities

Section 26 mandates the government to create insurance schemes for employees with disabilities in government services.

Rehabilitation in Health, Education and Employment

Section 27 requires the government to undertake rehabilitation services in the areas of health, education and employment for all persons with disabilities, in consultation with NGOs and provide financial assistance for implementation.

Cultural Life and Recreational Activities

Section 29 fosters cultural and recreational participation for persons with disabilities by sponsoring talent, establishing a disability history museum, ensuring accessibility and providing assistive devices and inclusive media.

Accessibility in Infrastructure and Public Spaces

Sections 40, 41 and 44-46 emphasize ensuring accessibility in public spaces, including:

• New buildings must adhere to accessibility standards for persons with disabilities.
• Older buildings should be renovated to include these facilities.
• Public transport must be made accessible, ensuring people with disabilities can independently use services like ATMs, health centers, schools, railway stations and bus stops.
• Governments are required to publish an action plan for accessibility in essential service areas.

Grievance Redressal and Special Courts

Chief Commissioner of Persons with Disabilities – Nodal Grievance Redressal Authority

The Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities is the key authority to address grievances and issues concerning persons with disabilities. According to Section 74 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, this role is supported by two Commissioners, one of whom must be a person with a disability. The Chief Commissioner is assisted by an advisory committee of up to 11 members drawn from disability experts.

Functions and Duties of the Chief Commissioner:

Section 75 assigns the Chief Commissioner responsibilities such as recommending legal reforms, addressing rights violations, monitoring the RPwD Act’s implementation, promoting research and awareness, overseeing fund utilization and fulfilling central government directives.

Powers of the Chief Commissioner:

Under Section 77, the Chief Commissioner is granted civil court powers, including:

• Summoning witnesses, requiring document production and requisitioning public records.
• Receiving evidence on affidavits and issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents.

State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities

Section 79 mandates state governments to appoint a State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, supported by an advisory committee, to address legal inconsistencies, investigate rights violations, promote awareness, monitor the RPwD Act's implementation and ensure proper fund utilization.

Special Courts for Speedy Trials

Section 84 mandates the establishment of Special Courts in each district for the speedy trial of offences under the RPwD Act, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the respective High Court.

Public Prosecutors in Special Courts:

Section 85 requires state governments to appoint a Special Public Prosecutor, preferably with at least 7 years of experience, for the prosecution of cases in these courts.

Grievance Redressal in Employment for Persons with Disabilities

Section 23 mandates the appointment of a Grievance Redressal Officer (GRO) in every government establishment to address employment-related grievances of persons with disabilities.

Procedure for Grievance Redressal:

• The GRO is responsible for investigating complaints and taking corrective actions within two weeks of registration.
• If the aggrieved person is dissatisfied with the resolution, they can escalate the issue to the District-Level Committee on Disability.

These provisions aim to ensure that persons with disabilities have accessible, timely and effective means of seeking redressal for violations of their rights and grievances in both legal and employment settings.

Offences and Penalties under the RPwD Act

Penalties for Offences:

The Penalties prescribed for offences committed under the RPwD Act are as follows:

• First contravention: A fine of up to Rs 10,000.
• Subsequent contravention: A fine ranging from Rs 50,000 to Rs 5 lakh.
• If an offence is committed by a company and it is proven that the offence was committed with the consent, connivance, or neglect of any director or officer, such individuals will be deemed guilty and liable to punishment.
• Fraudulent benefits: For fraudulently availing benefits meant for persons with benchmark disabilities, the penalty can be imprisonment for up to two years, a fine of up to Rs 1 lakh, or both.
• Offences related to assault and mistreatment:
  • • Insulting, intimidating, or humiliating a person with a disability in public view, or assaulting or using force to dishonor or outrage the modesty of a woman with a disability, results in imprisonment for not less than six months, which may extend to five years, with a fine.
    • Other severe offences, such as denying food or fluids, sexually exploiting, or injuring a person with a disability, can also result in imprisonment and fines.
    • For non-consensual medical procedures, such as termination of pregnancy without consent or a registered medical practitioner's opinion, the penalty includes imprisonment and fines.
• Failure to produce documents or furnish information: If an individual or organization willfully fails to produce documents or provide necessary information, they can be fined up to Rs 25,000 for each offence. Continued failure or refusal to comply can result in additional fines of up to Rs 1,000 per day after the original penalty order.

Actions a Person with Disability Can Take If Provisions Are Not Implemented:

If a person with a disability faces non-implementation or violation of the provisions under this law, they can take the following actions:

• Make a representation to the concerned government or establishment for addressing the deprivation or violation of rights.
• If there is no response or the response is negative or inadequate, they can approach the Commissioner of Disabilities for assistance.
• Alternatively, they can file a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the concerned High Court.
• If the violation concerns a Constitutional right of national importance, a Writ Petition can be filed under Article 32 before the Supreme Court.

These measures ensure that persons with disabilities have legal recourse and remedies when their rights are not upheld under the RPwD Act.

RECENT RULING OF SUPREME COURT, IN RAJIVE RATURI V. UNION OF INDIA (2024)

The Court emphasized that Rule 15, being discretionary, was at odds with the mandatory obligations imposed by Sections 40, 44, 45, 46 and 89 of the Act.

Rule 15, which notified accessibility guidelines from various ministries, allowed discretion in implementation, conflicting with the Act's mandatory nature. The Court directed the government to develop minimum mandatory accessibility standards within three months.

Key Points:

• Invalidation of Rule 15: Rule 15, which allowed discretionary implementation of accessibility guidelines, was inconsistent with the mandatory nature of the following sections of the RPwD Act:
  • • Section 40: Duty of the government to ensure accessibility.
    • Section 44: Accessible transport.
    • Section 45: Accessibility in built environment.
    • Section 46: Public facilities.
    • Section 89: Directives for effective implementation.

The Court directed the government to create minimum mandatory accessibility standards within three months.

• Principle-Based Guidelines: Accessibility standards should be universal, inclusive, and intersectional, moving away from fragmented approaches.
• Accessibility vs. Reasonable Accommodation:
  • • Accessibility: Standardized environments for all.
    • Reasonable accommodation: Tailored solutions for specific barriers. Both are complementary.

 Evolving Standards:

• Role of Technology: Advances like AI and IoT require updated digital accessibility guidelines.
• Phased Approach: Accessibility needs progressive implementation. The Court cited Canada’s model of achieving full accessibility by 2040 with periodic reviews.

Inclusivity:

• Universal Design: Accessibility must include persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups like women, children, and the elderly.
• Social Audits: Regular audits under Section 48 are vital but need clear guidelines for consistency and effectiveness.

Simplifying Implementation:

• Practical Guidelines: New rules should be simple, clear and enforceable. A nodal authority should oversee their implementation.

Deadline:

The government must publish the new guidelines by February 2024 (extendable). This judgment promotes inclusivity and aligns with both legal mandates and economic opportunities.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Rajive Raturi v. Union of India (2024) calls for mandatory accessibility standards under the RPwD Act. It invalidated Rule 15 for being discretionary urging the government to set minimum mandatory standards within three months. The Court stressed the need for a principle-based, inclusive approach and clear, practical guidelines for accessibility. It emphasized social audits and a progressive implementation model, with a deadline of February 2024 for new guidelines to ensure universal accessibility for all.

The ruling is significant as it ensures uniform, enforceable accessibility standards that promote inclusivity and address the needs of all particularly vulnerable groups driving real change in accessibility across the country.

The Hindu