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to  as  the  ‘Disabilities  Act,  1995’)  which  now stands  repealed  and  is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

Kerala1 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 etc2.   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  theorist3.  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)