How Supreme Court Protected Disability Rights In 2022?

According to the latest official records, there are 2.68 crore persons with disabilities in India constituting more than two percent of the population. However, since the last census was conducted more than a decade ago, the actual numbers are likely to far exceed the official figures. Persons with disabilities in the country form an extremely vulnerable minority despite constitutional guarantees and statutory protections contained in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, or its predecessor, the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, among other enactments. Because our society, and as its extension, the legal and political system, and even the nomenclature in use, are designed based on the ‘able-bodied’ normal, persons with disabilities often encounter discrimination and exclusion on a daily basis. As the ‘sentinel on the qui vive’, the Supreme Court has often stepped in to protect the rights of persons with disabilities, sometimes against the government itself. In this article, we will look back at the notable judgements and orders on disability rights delivered by the top court in 2022. 1. UGC directed to finalise guidelines to ensure implementation of RWPD Act The Supreme Court in January, while hearing a miscellaneous application arising out of a 2017 judgement on disability rights, ordered the University Grants Commission to finalise guidelines for the inspection of educational institutions to ensure the implementation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and commence the inspection work proactively. The order read, “A draft working framework for guidelines has been placed on the record. The status report indicates that visiting teams are being finalized to formulate modalities to carry out inspection of educational institutions to ensure implementation of the provisions of the RPWD Act and a Committee of experts would be set up for this purpose. The guidelines are expected to be finalised shortly, after which inspections are envisaged. We direct the UGC to ensure that the guidelines are finalised before the next date of hearing. Work on the inspections should also commence. A status report should be filed of the progress made. We request the UGC to be proactive.” Subsequently, in March, the commission informed the top court that it had published draft guidelines to ensure access for persons with disabilities in higher educational institutions, on which suggestions had been solicited from stakeholders. Case: Disabled Rights Group v. Union of India Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 50 Date: January 10, 2022 Coram: Justices D.Y. Chandrachud (as he was then) and A.S. Bopanna 2. Definition of ‘vulnerable witness’ expanded to include persons with disabilities Noting that “the need for and importance for setting up special facilities which cater to the creation of a safe and barrier-free environment for recording the evidence of vulnerable witnesses has been engaging the attention of this court over the last two decades”, the Supreme Court in January gave an expanded meaning to the phrase ‘vulnerable witness’ contained in Clause 3 of the vulnerable witness deposition centres (VWDC) scheme formulated by the Delhi High Court so as to include categories of persons other than child witnesses, such as witnesses suffering from mental illness as defined under Section 2(s) of the Mental Healthcare Act of 2017 read with Section 118 of the Indian Evidence act and any speech or hearing impaired individual or a person suffering from any other disability who is considered to be a vulnerable witness by the competent court. Further, all High Courts were directed to adopt and notify a vulnerable witness deposition (VWDC) scheme within a period of two months and set up permanent VWDC committees. A slew of other directions were also issued. Case: Smruti Tukaram Badade v. The State of Maharashtra Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 80 Date: January 11, 2022 Coram: Justices D.Y. Chandrachud (as he was then) and Surya Kant 3. Indian Railways directed to revisit employment criteria for RPF constables barring Lasik surgery “The advancement of medical field over a period of time has been enormous,” the Supreme Court noted in March, as it directed the Indian Railways to constitute a committee to revisit its decision disqualifying persons with a history of Lasik surgery for the post of constables in the Railway Protection Force (RPF). The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by candidates who were held unfit for service for having undergone the surgery in certain categories of work not requiring fine technical work or the operation of heavy machinery. In a subsequent order, the Bench recorded that the Railway Board constituted a technical committee comprising three ophthalmologists, pursuant to the report of which, Lasik surgery would henceforth be allowed subject to the stipulated conditions with...

How Supreme Court Protected Disability Rights In 2022?

Awstika Das

In this article, we will look back at the notable judgements and orders on disability rights delivered by the top court in 2022.

Tags