SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Kar) 660

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
N.V. ANJARIA, CJ., K.V. ARAVIND, J.
N. Shreyas, S/o. D. Nagaraj and Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
The Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Represented By Its Managing Director and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 10744 Of 2022 (GM-RES) PIL
Decided On : 15-11-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Sri N. Shreyas, Adv.
For the Respondents: Sri P.D. Surana, Adv., Smt. Niloufer Akbar, Addl. Govt. Adv.

The court affirmed that the right to accessibility for persons with disabilities is a fundamental right under Article 21, mandating the state to ensure operational audio announcement systems in public transport.

Headnote:(A) Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - Sections 3 and 41 - Public interest petition regarding accessibility for persons with disabilities in public transport - Right to accessibility is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, ensuring dignity and equality for differently abled persons - The court emphasized the state's positive obligation to provide necessary facilities, including audio announcement systems in buses, to promote mobility and accessibility for persons with disabilities. (Paras 2, 3.1, 5, 10)

(B) Public Interest Litigation - The petitioners, a visually impaired advocate and a non-profit organization, challenged the withdrawal of audio announcement systems in public transport, asserting it violated statutory mandates for accessibility. The court directed the authorities to restore and enhance accessibility measures for the visually impaired. (Paras 3.1, 10)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners contended that the discontinuation of the audio announcement system in buses adversely affected the visually impaired community, leading to difficulties in recognizing bus stops and navigating public transport. (Paras 3.1, 5)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the withdrawal of the audio announcement system disregarded the statutory mandate for accessibility and directed its restoration and enhancement in public transport. (Paras 6, 10)

Issues: The main issues included the legality of withdrawing the audio announcement system and the obligations of the state under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act. (Paras 3.1, 10)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the state has a positive obligation to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities, emphasizing the need for operational audio announcement systems in public transport to facilitate their mobility. (Paras 2, 10)

Result: The petition was disposed of with directions to restore and enhance the audio announcement system in public transport for persons with disabilities.

JUDGMENT :

(N.V. ANJARIA, CJ., K.V. ARAVIND, J.)

The present public interest petition is an instance where the LOCUS STANDI of the petitioner as public interest petition as well as the cause sought to be espoused, ideally fit in within the concept of public interest and the norms for exercise of public interest jurisdiction.

1.1 The subject matter and the cause advanced is about the right to accessibility for the persons with disability in terms of availing them the facility in the area of public transport utility through operation of Audio Announcement System in buses.

1.2 The petitioner No.1 is himself a visually impaired, who is also a practicing Advocate and as stated by him, has been commuting more often than not in the public transport buses run by the respondents. Petitioner No.2 is a non-profit organization engaged in the activities of upliftment of status of the persons with disability and differently abled persons in the society.

2. Right to accessibility is a fundamental right. It is a right to be availed actively and emphatically to the persons with disabilities or to the class of persons who are differently abled persons, either physically or mentally. Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution which engulfs the right to live with dignity necessitates that for the class of differently abled persons accessibility is ensured to enable them to live life with dignity, equality and equal opportunities to achieve for them to lead life by remaining in the main stream of the society.

2.1 Section 3 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “PwD Act”) mandates the appropriate government to ensure equality and non-discrimination for the persons with disabilities. The provision is extracted hereunder,

“3. Equality and Non-Discrimination.- (1) The appropriate Government shall ensure that the persons with disabilities enjoy the right to equality, life with dignity and respect for his or her integrity equally with others.

(2) The appropriate Government shall take steps to utilise the capacity of persons with disabilities by providing appropriate environment.

(3) No person with disability shall be discriminated on the ground of disability, unless it is shown that the impugned act or omission is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

(4) No person shall be deprived of his or her personal liberty only on the ground of disability.

(5) The appropriate Government shall take necessary steps to ensure reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities.”

2.2 Similarly, Section 41 of the PwD Act provides for access to transport for such class of persons. The Section is as under,

“41. Access to transport.—(1) The appropriate Government shall take suitable measures to provide,—

(a) facilities for persons with disabilities at bus stops, railway stations, and airports conforming to accessibility standards relating to parking spaces, toilets, ticketing counters, and ticketing machines;

(b) access to all modes of transport that conform to the design standards, including retrofitting old modes of transport, wherever technically feasible and safe for persons with disabilities, economically viable and without entailing major structural changes in design;

(c) accessible roads to address mobility necessary for persons with disabilities.

(2) The appropriate Government shall develop schemes programs to promote the personal mobility of persons with disabilities at an affordable cost to provide for,—

(a) incentives and concessions;

(b) retrofitting of vehicles; and

(c) personal mobility assistance."

2.3 The State is enjoined to promote the rights of persons with disabilities to fruition in accordance with the principles of reasonable accommodation and non-discrimination.

2.4 The subject of the present public interest petition is guided by the above salutary statutory mandate that in any walk of life and in all spheres of activities, the persons with disabilities are able to enjoy the right to accessibility, in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top