Context: A 3-Judge bench of the Supreme Court in Rajive Raturi vs. UoI & Ors. case confirmed that disabled persons’ right to access environments, services and opportunities is an essential human and fundamental right.

• The judgement is based on a report submitted by the Centre for Disability Studies, NALSAR University of Law and upholds the social model of disability.

• Social model of disability focuses on social change for inclusion and equality of PwDs by removing social barriers preventing their full participation. 

• The court asked the government to enable the creation of public and private spaces, services and products of an ‘universal design’ which could be accessed by everyone, regardless of their ability, age, or status.

Issues faced by PwDs (as per CDS NALSAR Report)

• Accessibility barriers: Lacunae in accessibility measures in courts, prisons, schools, public transport, etc.

• Intersectionality and compounded discrimination: Overlap of multiple disabilities like caste, gender etc. with disabilities faced by PwDs compounds discrimination and marginalization.

• Inconsistency in legal framework: RPwD Act, 2016 requires mandatory compliance with a set of non-negotiable rules whereas, Rule 15 under RPwD Rules, 2017 prescribes only self-regulatory guidelines.

Key highlights of the Judgment

• Rule 15(1) ultra vires the scheme and legislative intent of mandatory compliance of the RPWD Act.

• Court listed principles of accessibility to be considered - Universal design, Comprehensive inclusion across Disabilities, Assistive Technology Integration and Stakeholder consultation.

• Two-pronged approach: Ensuring accessibility in existing institutions/activities and transforming new infrastructure and future initiatives.

Initiatives for Accessibility for PwDs

• Rights-based approach: Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 giving effect to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

• Article 9 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

• Accessible India Campaign (Sugamya Bharat Abhiyan)

Important Judicial Pronouncements

• State of Himachal Pradesh v. Umed Ram Sharma (1986): Inclusion of right to accessibility under Right to Life (Article 21).

• Disabled Rights Group v. Union of India (2017): Directions to ensure reservation of seats in educational institutions for PwDs.