Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI., Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J.
Seema Girija Lal & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No. 29329 of 2021
Decided On : 24-04-2023
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 - Non-formulation of rules and non-constitution of District Level Committees
Fact of the Case:
The Union of India filed an affidavit indicating that certain States/Union Territories had not formulated rules under Section 101 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 and had not constituted District Level Committees under Section 72 of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court issued notice to the States/Union Territories and granted permission for the Union Ministry to file a comprehensive affidavit within two weeks.
Issues: Non-formulation of rules under Section 101 and non-constitution of District Level Committees under Section 72 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the non-compliance of certain States/Union Territories with the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016.
Final Decision: Notice was issued to the non-compliant States/Union Territories and permission was granted for the Union Ministry to file a comprehensive affidavit within two weeks. The petition was listed for a future date.
ORDER
1. The affidavit filed by the Union of India indicates that the following States/Union Territories have not formulated rules under Section 101 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016, namely:
1 Andhra Pradesh;
2 Chattisgarh;
3 Maharashtra; and
4 Union Territory of Ladakh
2. The affidavit also indicates that the following States/Union Territories have not constituted District Level Committees under Section 72 of the Act:
1 Andhra Pradesh;
2 Kerala;
3 Union Territory of Chandigarh;
4 Union Territory of Dadar and Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu;
5 Union Territory of Ladakh; and
6 Union Territory of Lakshadweep
3. Notice shall issue to the above States/Union Territories. Liberty to serve the respective Standing Counsel.
4. Ms Madhavi Divan, Additional Solicitor General states that after the counter affidavit was filed, more information has come within the possession of the Union Ministry and, hence she would like to place a comprehensive affidavit on the record. Permission to do so is granted within a period of two weeks.
5. List the Petition on 12 May 2023.
Non-compliance with the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 led to the court's decision to issue notice and grant permission for filing a comprehensive affidavit.
Project Ability Empowerment – It is appropriate that National Law Universities entrusted with exercise under “Project Ability Empowerment”, in terms of directions issued by this Court, undertake deta....
The establishment of the Uttarakhand Disability Fund and the Rajya Devyangjan Salahkaar Board was confirmed, with a directive for timely implementation of the Draft Rules.
The legal principle established is the obligation of the State to align its notification with the suggestions made by the Union of India for the inclusion of persons with hard of hearing in the reser....
The court interpreted the relevant provisions of the Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act, 2016 and National Trust Act, 1999 liberally to effectuate their purpose and emphasized the formation of t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the enforcement of reservations for persons with disabilities in promotions, as mandated by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
