Universities Must Ensure Equal Access: Delhi High Court on Disability Rights in Higher Education

Court: Delhi High Court
Bench: Justice Jasmeet Singh
Case No.: W.P.(C) 5390 of 2022
Case Title: Jayant Singh Raghav v. University of Delhi & Ors.
Date of Judgment: 25 February 2026
 
Background
 
The petition before the Delhi High Court concerned the accessibility of higher education institutions and the obligations of universities to ensure that students with disabilities are able to participate fully in academic programmes. The petitioner, a student with disability studying at the Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, approached the Court alleging that certain administrative and institutional practices of the University of Delhi created barriers that hindered the effective participation of students with disabilities.
 
The petitioner contended that despite the statutory obligations imposed by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, several academic processes—including access to facilities, academic support mechanisms and institutional procedures—had not been adequately designed to accommodate students with disabilities. As a result, students were often required to navigate inaccessible infrastructure and inflexible administrative procedures.
 
The petition therefore raised broader concerns regarding the responsibility of universities to implement accessibility measures and to create inclusive educational environments consistent with the objectives of the RPwD Act.
 
Key Observations
 
The Delhi High Court emphasised that educational institutions bear a crucial responsibility in ensuring that students with disabilities are able to access and benefit from academic opportunities on an equal basis. Universities must therefore adopt institutional practices that actively promote inclusion rather than inadvertently creating barriers.
 
The Court observed that the RPwD Act requires educational institutions to provide reasonable accommodation, accessible infrastructure and appropriate academic support mechanisms. These obligations extend beyond physical accessibility and include ensuring that academic procedures, examination systems and administrative processes are designed in a manner that enables participation by students with disabilities.
 
The Court further noted that universities, as public institutions performing an important social function, must act in a manner consistent with constitutional values of equality and dignity. Failure to implement accessibility measures within educational institutions undermines the purpose of disability rights legislation and restricts the ability of students with disabilities to realise their full academic potential.
 
Importantly, the Court highlighted that inclusive education is not merely a policy aspiration but a statutory requirement under the RPwD Act.
 
Directions Issued
 
• The Court directed the University of Delhi to review the accessibility measures implemented at the Campus Law Centre and ensure compliance with obligations under the RPwD Act.
• Authorities were instructed to adopt appropriate measures to provide reasonable accommodation and necessary support mechanisms for students with disabilities.
• The University was directed to ensure that infrastructural and administrative arrangements remain accessible and responsive to the needs of students with disabilities.
 
Commentary
 
The judgment underscores the central role that educational institutions play in advancing disability rights. Access to higher education is often a critical pathway for social mobility, professional development and economic independence. When universities fail to create inclusive environments, the consequences extend far beyond individual students and affect broader efforts to achieve equality in society.
 
Historically, higher education institutions have been slow to adapt their structures to the needs of students with disabilities. Inaccessible buildings, inflexible examination systems and limited academic support services have often created barriers that prevent students from fully participating in university life.
 
By emphasising the statutory obligations imposed by the RPwD Act, the Delhi High Court reaffirmed that universities must move beyond symbolic commitments to inclusion. Accessibility must be integrated into the design of institutional policies, infrastructure and academic practices.
 
The decision therefore contributes to the broader development of disability rights jurisprudence in India by highlighting that inclusive education is essential to achieving meaningful equality. Universities must act not merely as providers of education but as institutions committed to ensuring that all students—regardless of disability—are able to participate and succeed within the academic community.

Read the judgement [PDF 28 KB]

Disability Benefits for Armed Forces Personnel Must Be Interpreted Liberally: Delhi High Court on Service Rights of Disabled Soldiers

Court: Delhi High Court
Bench: Justice C. Hari Shankar & Justice Om Prakash Shukla
Case No.: W.P.(C) 17070/2025
Case Title: Union of India v. Col. Surender Mohan
Date of Judgment: 11 November 2025
 
Background
 
The case arose from a writ petition filed by the Union of India challenging an order of the Armed Forces Tribunal which had granted disability pension to the respondent, a retired Army officer suffering from primary hypertension.
 
The respondent, Col. Surender Mohan, had earlier challenged the decision of the authorities denying him disability pension and related benefits on the ground that the disability was not attributable to or aggravated by military service.
 
The respondent argued that the medical condition had manifested while he was in active service and that the denial of disability benefits was inconsistent with the principles governing disability pension for armed forces personnel. He contended that service conditions in the armed forces are often physically demanding and stressful, and therefore the assessment of disability claims must take into account the unique circumstances under which such personnel perform their duties.
 
The Union of India defended the decision, relying on medical board findings that concluded the disability was not attributable to service conditions. The dispute therefore centred on the interpretation of the rules governing disability pension and the degree of deference courts should accord to medical board determinations.
 
Key Observations
 
The Delhi High Court emphasised that the framework governing disability benefits for armed forces personnel must be interpreted in a manner that recognises the special nature of military service. Soldiers are often required to operate under physically demanding and stressful conditions, and therefore the assessment of disability claims cannot be approached in an unduly restrictive manner.
 
The Court observed that while medical board findings play an important role in determining disability claims, such findings cannot be treated as conclusive where they fail to adequately consider the circumstances of military service. Judicial review remains available to ensure that disability claims are assessed in accordance with the principles of fairness and justice.
 
The Bench further noted that disability pension provisions are intended to provide financial security and dignity to personnel who suffer health complications during service. A narrow or technical interpretation of these provisions would defeat their underlying purpose.
 
The Court therefore emphasised that disability benefit rules must be interpreted liberally in favour of service personnel, particularly where the medical condition has manifested during active service.
 
Directions Issued
 
• The Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the Union of India challenging the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal.
• The judgment of the Armed Forces Tribunal granting disability pension to the respondent was affirmed.
• The authorities were directed to ensure compliance with the Tribunal’s order within the stipulated period.
 
Commentary
 
The judgment highlights the complex relationship between disability rights jurisprudence and the specialised framework governing the armed forces. While the military operates under a distinct legal regime, the fundamental principles of fairness and dignity continue to guide judicial interpretation of service-related benefits.
 
Disability pension disputes frequently arise from disagreements between medical board assessments and the experiences of service personnel. Courts have therefore played an important role in ensuring that such assessments are not applied in a rigid or mechanical manner that undermines the purpose of disability benefit schemes.
 
By emphasising the need for a liberal interpretation of disability pension provisions, the Delhi High Court reaffirmed the principle that service personnel who develop medical conditions during active duty should not be denied support through narrow technical reasoning.
 
The decision also reflects a broader judicial sensitivity toward the welfare of armed forces personnel who suffer disabilities during service. Ensuring that such individuals receive appropriate financial and institutional support is essential not only for their personal dignity but also for maintaining the integrity of the service system as a whole.

Read the Judgement [PDF 1.3 MB]