Back
2018 Supreme(HP) 1889
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Sanjay Karol, ACJ., Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
Mukesh Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State Of H.p - Respondent
CWP No. 992 of 2018.
Decided On : 23-07-2018
Sanjay Verma, Advocate, for the Petitioners; Ashok Sharma, Advocate General, with M/s Ranjan Sharma, Adarsh Sharma and Nand Lal Thakur, Additional Advocates General, for the Respondent No. 1.; Neel Kamal Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondents No. 2 and 3.; Rajesh Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India, for the Respondent No. 4.
The judgment emphasizes the duty of the State and educational institutions to implement the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and ensure the rights and accessibility of persons with disabilities.
Headnote:
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act - Accessibility of Government Buildings - Section 46, Sections 41, 60, and 66 - Summary of the judgment's legal framework and provisions
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners highlighted non-implementation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and the difficulties faced by special students at Himachal Pradesh University.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the response of the University to be callous and insensitive, and directed the Chairman, District Legal Services Authority to inspect the campus and submit a report.
Issues: Non-implementation of the Act and the directions issued by the Apex Court, and the difficulties faced by special students.
Ratio Decidendi: The court directed an inspection of the university campus to ascertain the factual position with regard to the implementation of the Act and the directions issued by the Apex Court.
Final Decision: The court directed the Chairman, District Legal Services Authority to inspect the campus and submit a report, and scheduled the next hearing for further proceedings.
JUDGMENT
1. Taking note of the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and the duties and obligations cast upon the State, both under the International Conventions and the Constitution of India, holding the Right to Life to live with dignity and more so, in the case of persons suffering from visual impairment and other physical disabilities, to be part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Apex Court in Rajive Raturi v. Union of India and others, (2018) 2 Supreme Court Cases 413 issued the following directions:
"34. Having regard to the aforesaid position emerging on record, we dispose of these petitions with the following directions:
(i) Making 20-50 important government buildings in 50 cities fully accessible December 2017 (State Govt. Buildings)
34.1. Since, this deadline is set by the AIC itself, this should be met. In any case, as per the provisions of Section 46 of the Disabilities Act, 2016, all Government buildings providing any services to the public are to be made fully accessible by June, 2019 which has to be adhere to.
(ii) Making 50% of all the govt. buildings of the national capital and all the state capitals fully accessible by December, 2018.
34.2 Though the deadline for identifying the buildings was fixed as February 28, 2017, according to status report dated August 8, 2017, only seven States have identified the buildings. Remaining States are directed to identify the buildings by February 28, 2018 and it is made clear that no further time in this behalf shall be granted. Insofar as deadline for retrofitting is concerned, the work should be completed by December, 2018.
(iii) Completing accessibility audit of 50% of govt. buildings and making them fully accessible in 10 most important cities/towns of states/UTs not covered in targets (i) and (ii) by December 2019.
34.3. Position regarding this action point is the same as noted in respect of action point 2, namely, only seven States have submitted their list of 10 most important cities/towns and not a single building has been identified so far. The States are, therefore, directed to identify 10 most important cities/towns and complete accessibility audit of 50% of Government buildings in these cities/towns by February 28, 2018. Likewise, retrofitting of these be completed by December 2019 as per the revised deadline set out by CCC.
(iv) Central Govt. buildings.
34.4. Having regard to the comments given by the petitioner in its affidavit dated 23.8.2017 on this aspect, time-frame of August, 2018 is given for completing this target.
(v) Accessibility in airports. Completing accessibility audit of all the international airports and making them fully accessible by December 2016.
34.5. The demand of the petitioner that Civil Aviation Ministry should follow the prescribed template i.e. IIT Roorkee template on the Government website appears to be justified which should be implemented as expeditiously as possible. The Union of India should thereafter conduct the accessibility and audit and upload the same on the website by June, 2018.
(vi) Accessibility in Railways. Ministry of Railways was required to make all A1, A and B category railway stations fully accessible by July 2016. 50% of all railway stations to made fully accessible by March 2018.
34.6. As is clear from the affidavit dated June 30, 2017 filed by the petitioner, as many as 12 directions are sought under this action point. Insofar as providing of various facilities in the railway stations are concerned, which are listed by the petitioner, there cannot be any dispute that the Indian railways is statutorily obligated to make those provisions. The petitioner has, however, sought time bound directions for providing such facilities. Wherever the provisions of the Disabilities Act, 2016 prescribe the deadlines, the respondent is to provide those facilities within those time framework. Insofar as other facilities are concerned, in respect of which the petitioner wants those facilit
