RAJIVE RATURI versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2024] 11 S.C.R. 970 · Decided: 08-11-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Directions issued

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 7 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 11 S.C.R. 970 : 2024 INSC 858
Rajive Raturi 
v. 
Union of India & Ors. 
(Writ Petition No. 243 of 2005)
08 November 2024
[Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud,* CJI,  
J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Writ Petition sought directions to ensure meaningful access to 
public spaces for persons with disabilities (PWDs). Directions were 
issued by this Court to the States and Union Territories however, 
in view of slow progress in compliance, the Centre for Disability 
Studies, NALSAR University of Law was appointed to assess the 
situation on the ground and recommend steps to ensure compliance 
with accessibility standards for PWDs. Submissions filed by the 
petitioner; report submitted by NALSAR-CDS.
Headnotes†
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – s.40 – Right 
of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 – r.15(1) – r.15(1),  
if ultra vires the 2016 Act:
Held: Yes – Guidelines prescribed in Rule 15 are recommendatory 
under the garb of mandatory rules – Rule 15(1) is ultra vires the 
scheme and legislative intent of the RPWD Act which creates a 
mechanism for mandatory compliance – Union Government to 
delineate mandatory rules, as required by Section 40, within three 
months from the date of this Judgment – This exercise may involve 
segregating the non-negotiable rules from the expansive guidelines 
already prescribed in Rule 15 – Union Government must conduct 
this exercise in consultation with all stakeholders – NALSAR-
CDS to be involved in the process – Progressive compliance with 
the standards listed in the existing Rule 15(1) and the progress 
towards the targets of the Accessible India Campaign must continue 
unabated – However, in addition, a baseline of non-negotiable rules 
must be prescribed in Rule 15 – Once these mandatory rules are 
prescribed, the Union of India, States and Union Territories are 
directed to ensure that the consequences prescribed in Sections 44, 
45, 46 and 89 of the RPWD Act, including the holding back of 
*Author
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 
971
Rajive Raturi v. Union of India & Ors. 
completion certificates and imposition of fines are implemented 
in cases of non-compliance with Rule 15 – Various principles of 
accessibility to be considered while carrying out the aforesaid 
exercise, enumerated – Union Government to meaningfully consider 
the recommendations proposed by the petitioner and NALSAR-
CDS with regard to the existing legal framework, while reworking 
the content of Rule 15. [Paras 76, 77]
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – Disability as 
a Social Model– United Nations Convention on the Rights 
of Persons with Disabilities – Universal and Inclusive Model 
of Design – Goal, stated – Accessibility – Reasonable 
Accommodation and Accessibility – Two-Pronged Approach 
to accessibility:
Held: State cannot negate its duty to accessibility by relying 
solely on existing standards or waiting for individual requests – 
Accessibility is not a standalone right; it is a prerequisite for PWDs 
to exercise other rights meaningfully – Accessibility requires a 
two-pronged approach (i) that focuses on ensuring accessibility in 
existing institutions/activities and (ii) that focuses on transforming 
new infrastructure and future initiatives – Both are essential to 
achieving true inclusivity in society – Explained. [Para 34-36]
Accessibility – International Framework – Evolution, 
Recognition – Accessibility as a Human Right – International 
human rights treaties/conventions – United Nations Convention 
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – r.9 – International 
Principles and Guidelines on Access to Justice for Persons 
with Disabilities – Principle 2 – Universal Declaration of 
Human Rights – International Covenant on Civil and Political 
Rights – Discussed.
Right to Accessibility – Accessibility Jurisprudence –  
Foreign Jurisprudence vis-à-vis Indian Jurisprudence, stated – 
Constitution of India – Articles 14, 19, 21.
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – ss.2(b), 39, 40-46, 
89, 100 – Chapter VI – Right of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 
2017 – r.15 – Rules for Accessibility – Scheme of the Act – 
Inconsistencies between r.15 and the RPWD Act, highlighted. 
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – s.40 – Right 
of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 – r.15 – NALSAR 
Report  – Methodology in preparing its report, findings 
972
[2024] 11 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
summarized – Inadequate accessibility measures

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.