REENA BANERJEE AND ANOTHER versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

Citation: [2025] 9 S.C.R. 855 · Decided: 12-09-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAM NATH · Disposal: Directions issued
cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 9 S.C.R. 855 : 2025 INSC 1101
Reena Banerjee and Another 
v. 
Government of NCT of Delhi and Others
(I.A. No. 130117 of 2018) 
In 
(Civil Appeal No. 11938 of 2016)
12 September 2025
[Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
The present case concerns the implementation of the Rights 
of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 along with the prolonged 
institutionalisation. The lack of access to education, health, and 
community life for persons residing in State-run care institution/
homes, must be viewed through the expansive constitutional lens. 
Whether the institutional structures respect the autonomy, equality, 
and dignity of persons with disabilities as guaranteed under the 
Indian Constitution.
Headnotes†
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – Appointment 
of the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru, 
to undertake a nationwide monitoring of all State-run care 
institutions housing persons with cognitive disabilities – 
Directions issued:
Held: The monitoring be undertaken under the name and style of 
the “Project Ability Empowerment” and shall be undertaken by eight 
National Law Universities each covering specific States and/or Union 
Territories, as under: 1) National Law School of India University, 
Bengaluru, covering the States of Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, 
and Andhra Pradesh and Union Territories of Puducherry and 
Lakshadweep Islands; 2) National Law University, Delhi, covering 
the Union Territories of Delhi and Chandigarh; 3) Rajiv Gandhi 
National University of Law, Punjab, covering the States of Punjab, 
Haryana, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, and Union Territories of 
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh; 4) National Law University, Jodhpur, 
covering the States of Rajasthan and Gujarat and Union Territory 
of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu; 5) National Law 
* Author
856
[2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
University and Judicial Academy, Assam, covering the States of 
Assam, Tripura, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur, 
and Mizoram; 6) Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, 
Lucknow, covering the States of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh 
and Chhattisgarh; 7) West Bengal National University of Juridical 
Sciences, Kolkata, covering the States of West Bengal, Sikkim, 
Bihar, Jharkhand and Odisha and Union Territory of Andaman and 
Nicobar Islands; 8) Maharashtra National Law University, Mumbai, 
covering the States of Maharashtra, Goa and Telangana – These 
institutions, in conjunction with the Advisory Group Expert Panel and 
other experts associated with the present report, shall undertake 
extensive monitoring of all care institutions, whether state-run or 
private, housing persons with cognitive disabilities – The monitoring 
shall also extend to examining the implementation of the RPwD 
Act. [Para 36]
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – The Advisory 
Group Expert Panel and National Law Universities, conducting 
the proposed monitoring and data collation exercise of the 
Project Ability Empowerment, shall pay particular attention 
to certain key areas such as Resident Profiling, Care and 
Rehabilitation:
Held: i) A comprehensive mapping of residents should be 
undertaken, covering each individual residing in institutions for 
persons with cognitive disabilities – The purpose of individualised 
profiling is to facilitate better care planning, identify residents who 
no longer require institutional care, and develop feasible exit or 
reintegration strategies wherever appropriate – In this context, the 
preparation of an Individual Care Plan, on the lines contemplated 
under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 
2015, may be considered for the ‘Project Ability Empowerment’ to 
ensure that care and rehabilitation are tailored to the unique needs of 
each resident; ii) Due consideration must be paid to the availability, 
adequacy, and regularity of healthcare and therapeutic services 
provided/available within these institutions – The monitoring group 
should document whether residents have access to general health 
check-ups, emergency medical services, psychiatric consultations, 
and therapeutic interventions, including physiotherapy, occupational 
therapy, and speech therapy – Special consideration should be 
given to the use and review of psychiatric medications, and whether 
treatment plans are personalised and subject to periodic professional 
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 
857
Reena Banerjee and An
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.