Diverse Stakeholders Move Madras High Court in support of Accesssible Low Floor Buses - say, it also helps them - not just the disabled.

Kindly refer to our post dated 22 July 2022,  26 August 2022 on the subject of procurement of low floor accesssible buses in the State of Tamilnadu. Despite the Court directions, the State has been hell bent on arguing in favour of the high floor inaccessible buses that puts a large population of persons with disabilities in the state at a disadvantage and denying them their right to equality when it comes to public transportation. The state has been trying to argue that it would buy some percentage of buses as acessible low floor misinterpreting the Law of the land and citing reasons of floods and high costs of accesssible buses. 

The accessible low floor buses are not just an issue of disabled people alone. It impacts a large number of users of public transport such as women wearing saris, children, women who are family way, people of short stature. In fact, all persons feel safe when an accessible mode of transport is provided.

To support the case of demand for mandatory low floor accessible buses, a woman with mobility impairment on both her lower limbs, a 70-year-old lawyer with 44 years of standing in the Bar, a pregnant college student and a 68-year-old retired entrepreneur have moved Madras High Court through a public interest litigation, in support of a plea to ensure that all intra-city government buses are universally accessible. The PIL plea says that senior citizens, pregnant women and vendors also find it difficult to board the government buses, hencce the state needs to be directed to only purchase accessible low floor buses.

Acting Chief Justice T. Raja and D. Bharatha Chakravarthy on Monday granted time till December 21 for the Transport Department to respond to their petitions for impleading as parties in a public interest litigation (PIL) petition preferred by cross disability rights activist Vaishnavi Jayakumar of Chennai.

The activist had challenged a tender notification issued on October 10 for procuring 1,771 fully built non-AC diesel buses including 1,170 buses with a floor height of 900 mm. She contended that the law permits procurement of only low floor buses (400 mm) or with a maximum floor height of 650 mm with ramps/kneeling system/lifts for entry.

The Transport Department had already filed a counter affidavit stating that it would not be possible to ply only low floor buses in all cities unless and until the allied infrastructure, such as good roads, was fully in place. It also asserted that no law or court order had been violated in the recent tender notification.

However, in her affidavit in support of the impleading petition, P. Kavitha, a differently abled woman, said she was dependent on a pair of crutches and calipers for commuting from one place to another and that it was virtually impossible for her to either board or get down from buses with a floor height of 900 mm.

“The concentrated weight of the calipers on my lower limbs (which is around 4 kgs) makes the process of climbing the high steep steps extremely cumbersome and time consuming. As a result, I am often at the receiving end of my co-passengers’ irritation and impatience vis-à-vis holding up the bus,” she said.

She highlighted that inaccessibility of public transport affects the freedom of movement of persons with locomotor and other disabilities. The tender notification under challenge had been issued in callous disregard of the need for accessible public transport for the differently-abled individuals, she complained.

Advocate Sudha Ramalingam too wanted to implead herself as party in the case on the ground that high floor buses were nightmare to embark and disembark not only for the differently abled but also for the elderly dependent on public transport.

She said women with infants and young kids too find it difficult to access the high floor buses and that the fruit and flower vendors too struggle to get into the buses. Many had suffered injuries on the knees and legs while accessing the buses, she lamented and said, low floor buses were a fundamental requirement and not a luxury.

Similarly, T.S. Santhakumari, a 68-year-old retired entrepreneur, supported her view and said senior citizens with knee pain could not travel in government buses due to the very high floor height. She said that low floor buses would provide the elderly people the confidence and the joy of being able to travel without much difficulty.

Yet another impleading petitioner M.K. Divyadeshna, a 7-month pregnant college student, said, she had to travel from Tiruvallur to Guindy on a daily basis to pursue her studies. Government buses were the only affordable means of travel but the risk in travelling in them, due to their inaccessible nature, was beyond contemplation, she rued.

It is interesting to note as to how the state would cotinue to ignore the needs of a vast section of society misinterpreting the mandate of the accessibility law anchored in the Rights of Persons with Disability Act 2016 and Rules made thereunder.

Related News: The Hindu.  

Delhi HC: Children with Disabilities entitled to basic facilities free of costs that includes, school uniform, books, assistive devices, transportation etc. [Judgement Included]

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Bench: Justice Pratibha M Singh

Case No: W.P.(C) 14032/2022

Case Title: Manish Lenka Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Date of  Order: 12 December 2022

Next Date of Hearing: 22 March 2023

Subject: Free Educational Facilties for children with Disabilities

Matter in brief:

Petitioner, a student of Class 6 at a Kendriya Vidyalaya school in Noida, with a visual impairment of over 75 per cent, had moved the high court seeking a grant of books, learning material, and assistive devices along with other facilities provided under the RPWD Act. The boy’s counsel argued the child’s father is a daily wager who is unable to afford his son’s educational requirements.

The child claimed the facilities were not being provided by the school pursuant to which he approached the Court of Chief Commissioner under the RPWD Act. The Chief Commissioner on October 13, 2020, had directed that “books, learning materials, uniforms etc, as well as the facility of scribe/lab assistant” be granted to the student. The student claimed that despite the said order the facilities were not granted to him.

Submitting its status report before the high court, the school argued that all the items as requested had been provided including a scribe during offline exams for the 2021-22 session and the same shall be provided in future as well. However, the child’s counsel argued his client had not been given a waiver of the uniform fee, computer fee, and transportation cost to date.

Perusing the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (RPWD), 2016, the bench observed, “A perusal of the said provisions show that facilities such as uniform, computer fee and transportation cost are all covered under the statute… These constitute basic facilities for a child… Considering the recognition given to the rights of persons with disabilities, there can be no doubt that these facilities ought to be provided especially at Kendriya Vidyalaya Schools which are government schools present all over the country, in order to ensure that children with disabilities are not deprived of proper education”.

The bench directed the school to provide uniforms free of cost to the student within a period of two weeks and also waived the computer fee. With respect to transportation costs, since the school did not provide it, the child’s counsel was asked on the next date of the hearing to make a submission on the transportation cost incurred by the child for travelling between his home to the school and back.

The bench also directed the Centre to file a status report regarding the measures that are to be taken in regard to the transportation cost and other facilities as directed under the RPWD Act. The Centre was also directed to file a status report on the student’s requirement for an assistive device. The bench added if the child is not provided with the requisite facilities as directed by the court, he would be free to approach the Court by way of an application. 

The matter has been next listedon 22 March 2023.

Read the Judgement here:

Supreme Court of India appoints Committee for Accessibility Audit of Supreme Court Premises on International Day of Persons with Disabilities

05 Dec 2022, New Delhi, India

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dr D Y Chandrachud has decided for a comprehensive accessibility audit of the Supreme Court premises, with an aim of ensuring accessibility in the justice system and understanding the hardships faced by the specially-abled persons, in their interface with the Supreme Court.

On the International Day of Persons with Disabilities observed on December 3 every year, the CJI has constituted a "Supreme Court Committee on Accessibility" chaired by a sitting judge of the apex court. The initiative by the CJI is in lines with the World Health Organisation's this year theme "Transformative solutions for inclusive development: the role of innovation in fuelling an accessible and equitable world".

Justice S Ravindra Bhat will be in charge of the “Supreme Court Committee on Accessibility,” which has been tasked with carrying out an extensive accessibility audit of the Supreme Court’s facilities extending to both physical as well as technological accessibility. .

The committee’s member secretary will be an officer from the Supreme Court registry.  In addition, the committee consists of:

• A Bengaluru-based professor from NLSIU;
• Supreme Court employee with different abilities;
• A Supreme Court Bar Association-nominated Differently Abled Advocate;
• A person suggested by NALSAR University’s Centre for Disability Studies (Mr. Nilesh Singit)

The audit will cover both technology and physical accessibility. A questionnaire for people with disabilities who visit the Supreme Court premises to determine the nature and scope of their issues has also been assigned to the Committee for preparation and distribution. 

The Committee will also solicit input from advocates, litigants, interns, and other members of the Supreme Court. The Committee will prepare a report that will include the audit and survey results and recommendations for removing access barriers.

Court of CCPD holds the SBI's Promotion Policy to grades of SMGS IV and SMGS V (2022-23) as discriminatory to employees with visual disabilities, recommends review.

Court: Court of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, New Delhi

Bench/Presided by : Ms. Upma Srivastava, CCPD

Case No:  : 13348/1021/2022

Case Title: Visually lmpaired Bank Employees Welfare Association (VIBEWA) Vs. The Chairman, State Bank of India & Ors.

Date of  Order: 01 December 2022

Brief of the Case:

The petitioner Visually Impaired Bank Employees Welfare Association (VIBEWA) is an association of visually impaired people working in the banking, insurance and other financial sectors in India. VIBEWA is the first association in the country formed exclusively for the empowerment and welfare of visually impaired employees in the banking and other financial sectors. 

VIBEWA challenged the impugned Promotion Policy issued by the State Bank of India on 21 Jan 2022 to the grades of SMGS IV and SMGS V (2022-23) as being discriminatory towards employees with vision disabilities vis-a-vis their non-disabled counterparts. 

On one hand the SBI has exempted employees with disabilities from RUSU (Rural and Semi Urban) assignments as a reasonable accomodation but the impugned promotion policy brings in the marks for mandatory assignments of branch experience, branch manager assignment and credit assignments as a pre-condition for promotion to SMGS IV and SMGSV without giving any suitable alternate to visually impaired employees. The policy under challenge gives a 5% weightage in the form of marks for work experience in branches while arriving at the final merit list for promotions to SMGS IV and SMGS V.  But in reality, no visually impaired officers are posted by SBI to these very assignments as the functions attacehd to these assignments are visual in nature. This means the visually impaired officers will be at mercy of junior  employees to perform a part of that function/task which would put them  in vulnerable situation in which high probabilility of commission of fraud exists. 

Most visually impaired in the officer cadre in SBI are posted in establishments other than branches such as regional offices, credit processing cells, zonal offices, etc., as the jobs in such offices are more suitable for them to be productive.  

However, the weightage in marks for branch experience would put those visually impaired without branch experience at a highly disadvantageous position for no fault of theirs’ and in fact would put them in a position of -5 (minus five marks) at the beginning itself vis-à-vis their non disabled counterparts.  Such a policy would not only put the existing officers due to promotion at a disadvantage but also would force others to get posted in branches where the assignments are not ideally suitable for higher cadres like MMGS III. This will jeopardize their entire career and thus is a ploy to withhold them from equal opportunities of promotion. 

The petitioner avered that the impugned policy acted as a ‘barrier’ leading to ‘discrimination’ on the basis of disability in carrier progression of officers with visual disabilities and defeats the spirit of RPWD Act, DoPT guidelines and SBI’s own equal opportunity policy and would simply mean that a officer with blindness would start with minus five (-5) in the merit list of the promotion vis a vis his non-disabled counterparts.

On enquiry of the Hon'ble court about the procedure which existed before this impugned promotion policy came into effect, the respondent informed that prior to the impugned policy, the requirement of operational assignment was not there.

Petitioner submitted that evidently the visually impaired in the banking sector have proved to be very productive in the jobs relating to marketing, recoveries, digital promotions, Human Resources, training, research, monitoring and follow up etc. and SBI is no exception. In fact, some visually impaired officials have received the highest ratings for their performance in their annual appraisal while competing with officials without disabilities, which means bank itself has recognized them as the best in that particular area of work. Therefore, the respondent bank as a reasonable accommodation should identify assignments/ job roles for visually impaired which they are already successfully performing and count such jobs in place of or equal to the mandatory assignments for the purpose of arriving at final merit list for promotion. And thus VIBEWA prayed before the court seeking directions:-

a.   Exempting visually impaired officials from the marks assigned to branch experience in promotions to SMGS IV and SMGS V in arriving at final merit list, as a reasonable accommodation. 

b.   Exempting visually impaired officials from mandatory assignments in arriving at final merit list for all promotions, similar to exemption from RUSU (Rural and Semi Urban) assignment, as a reasonable accommodation.

c.     To identify roles/ jobs that are performed by visually impaired officials and count the jobs/ work experience of visually impaired officers relating to marketing, recoveries, digital promotions, HR, training, research, monitoring and follow up etc.  as equivalent to the current mandatory assignment introduced by the impugned policy with respect to vision impaired employees, as a reasonable accommodation.

d.   In respect of any visually impaired official who is eligible for promotion to SMGS IV and SMGS V in the promotion year 2022-23, the respondent needs to exclude the mandatory branch manager/credit assignment and reconsider the candidature of such officials for the purpose of arriving at the final merit list. The final merit of such an official be arrived at excluding the marks for branch experience by normalizing their score to 100 by the marks they have scored out of 95.

"The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 provides for equality in employment. lt is certain that intention of the statute is that no policy can be framed which is discriminatory to divyang employees. Such a policy (impunged by VIBEWA) will leave divyang employees with Visual lmpairment in situation where they will either be dependent upon mercy of other employees of whom they are taking assistance of or else it will be impossible for them to perform such functions in individual capacity and hence they will never be considered to promotion to the posts of SMGS-IV and SMGS-V. The impugned promotion policy excludes divyang employees with Visual lmpairment hence, such a policy must be done away with or reasonable accommodation for visually impaired should be provided for in the policy.",  the court concluded.

Accordingly the Hon'ble Court made the following recommendations: -

a) ln case of divyangjan with Visual Impairment similar weightage in marks should be given to them for performing some other functions which they can easily perform in individual capacity and without exposing themselves to unnecessary risk. 

b) Complainant in its reloinder has given list of various posts. Functions associated with such posts can be performed by divyangjan with Visual Impairment in individual capacity. Hence, Respondent is recommended to consider performance of divyang employees with Visual Impairment holding such posts while evaluating them for promotion, instead of considering 'branch experience', 'mandatory branch manager assignment' and 'credit assignment'. 

c) Accordingly, the policy should be reviewed to prevent exclusion and provide reasonable accommodation for giving them equal opportunity in promotion.

Read the Order below: 

Delhi HC: Make Foot overbridges accessible to persons with disabilities & senior citizens (Ongoing Case, NDOH 04 Dec 2023)

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ, Subramonium Prasad, J

Case No:  W.P.(C) 5347/2022

Case Title: Pankaj Mehta Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Date of  Order: 29 Nov 2022

Date of Hearings (click on dates for orders) : 23 March 2023, 10 May 2023, 04 Dec 2023

Brief of the Case:

A bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad has asked Govt. of National Capital Terriroty of Delhi (NCTD) to inform what steps were being taken to make all foot overbridges disabledfriendly.

The bench was hearing a plea to ensure accessibility to foot overbridges and other public amenities to persons with disabilities and senior citizens where the petitioner has claimed that even where such facilities are available, they are not functional. 

The petitioner had pointed out in the petition that  these foot overbridges have been constructed on extremely busy roads and the nonfunctional state of the elevators and escalators have effectively rendered the persons with disabilities and the elderly in a state of helplessness as they are unable to access even the roads, which is prima facie violative of the fundamental rights of such citizens.

The court pointed out that as per a status report filed by the GNCTD, out of 110 foot overbridges, only 36 have mechanised assistance for disabled people like lifts or escalators. The court asked the Govt. to make some arrangements for those bridges which are not disabled-friendly.

The Counsel for the GNCTD assured the Court that within 4 months, the entire survey will be carried out and the Government of Delhi will ensure that all the 110 FOBs under the jurisdiction of PWD (GNCTD) will be disabled-friendly, meaning thereby, either lifts will be installed or ramps will be constructed and prayed for 6 months’ time to conclude the aforesaid exercise. 

The petitioner had sought directions to authorities to ensure convenience of and full accessibility to lifts, foot overbridges and other public amenities to persons with disabilities and senior citizens, and ensure compliance with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. 

Read the Order of the Bench below:

Hearing Updates

23 March 2023:- Learned Counsel for the GNCTD prays for listing of the matter after two weeks as he has received some additional documents/ photographs in the matter from the Petitioner. The prayer is allowed. Learned Counsel for GNCTD shall also file a fresh status report in the matter within two weeks. List on 10.05.2023.

10 May 2023:-  A fresh Status Report has been filed. However, the same is not on record. Learned Counsel for the Respondent is grated a week’s time to place the reply on record. It is submitted by Mr. Satyakam, learned ASC for the GNCTD, that the Government is in process of making all foot-over bridges disabled friendly and for that a minimum six months’ time is required. Six months’ time is granted to the Government to do the needful. Let a fresh Status Report be filed by the Government after all the foot-over bridges are made disabled friendly. List on 04.12.2023.

Orissa HC quashes revised merit list for MBBS-BDS admission that puts disabled applicant from 5th to 33rd position.

Court:  High Court of Orissa at Cuttack

Bench: Dr. Justice B.R. Sarangi, and  Mr. Justice G. Satapathy, Justice

Case No. W.P (C) No. 28438 of 2022

Caste Title: Abhisek Bhabani Panda Vs.  State of Odisha and others

Date of Judgemement: 02.11.2022 

Case Brief:

A bench of Orissa high court quashed the revised merit list published by Odisha Joint Entrance Examination (OJEE) for admission into MBBS-BDS courses saying that it can't be changed unilaterally because a right has already been accrued in favour of the candidates whose name finds a place in the final merit list.

"It is well settled in law that once the rule of the game is started, the same cannot be changed at the midst," observed the two-judge bench of Justice B R Sarangi and Justice Gourishankar Satapathy. The October 19 revised merit list was published while counselling was on after the final list was out on October 18, 2022.

The petitioner whose name found mention in 5th place in the Disability category in the final merit list, had filed a petition seeking intervention against the revised list that had put his name in 33rd position, as it reduced his chances of getting admission in a government college. 

The bench said the merit list should not have been revised causing problem for candidates. "Needless to say, the final merit list was published by the authorities in consonance with the law and pursuant to the advertisement issued by them as well as the prospectus provided for. But in the name of subsequent change of law, publication of the revised merit list in the midst itself causes great prejudice to the candidates, who had already been selected," the bench observed in the order.

"This court is of the considered view that the revised final state merit list for MBBS/BDS admission 2022-23 (after the 1st round) of OJEE-2022, dated 19.10.2022, cannot sustain in the eye of law and the same is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed." ruled the bench.

It further ruled, "As such, the final merit list prepared by the authority vide Annexure-5 dated 18.10.2022 stands as it is, so far as physically challenged category is concerned. The opposite party nos.2 and 3 are directed to extend the benefit admissible to the physically challenged category candiates, in terms of the final State merit list published for MBBS/BDS admission 2022-23(After the 1st round) of the Odisha Joint Entrance Examination (OJEE-2022) under Annexure-5 dated 18.10.2022. As the counselling is going to expire on 04.11.2022, the petitioner shall be given opportunity to participate in the counselling.

Read the order/judgement here:

Chhattisgarh HC directs the PSC Raipur to appoint Visually Impaired Candidate who was denied appointment despite her merit position as the assistant did not mark her Physically Disabled in the form.

Court: Chhattisgarh High Court, Raipur

Bench: Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

Case No.:  WP(S) 4572 of 2020

Case Title: Bhojkumari Patel Vs. Chhattishgarh Public Service Commission Raipur

Brief

The Chhattisgarh high court has allowed a writ petition, filed by a 26-year-old visually impaired girl, Ms. Bhojkumari Patel and directed the state public service commission (PSC) to issue a selection list so that the higher education department can appoint her assistant professor of political science in the ‘blind’ category. 

The bench ordered the PSC to complete the process within 15 days of receiving the order, and the higher education department to issue an appointment order to petitioner within a month. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is 90% blind, the court said, adding that she fulfils all the criteria for the appointment and even “stood in the merit position” in the exam for assistant professor (blind category), yet her appointment has been denied.

The court said the inaction of the PSC in issuing an appointment order to a person with a disability goes against the aims and object of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

Bhojkumari Patel shared that she had to fight a legal battle for one and a half years to get justice because of an inadvertent error when she took assistance at a cybercafé to fill her application. She is hopeful of getting her  appointment order by December 2022.

The PSC had issued an advertisement on August 23, 2019, for appointments to the post of assistant professor. Patel has a masters’ in political science and cleared NET. Her blindness certificate was issued by Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, AIIMS-Delhi.

Being 90% blind, she was allowed the assistance of scribes to write the examination. She secured the highest mark in her category and was selected for the interview phase. She was shocked when she didn’t find her name on the list of selected candidates. 

On inquiring, she found that the person who helped fill her application had clicked ‘no’ in the column for ‘physical disability’. Therefore, she was not selected. She then submitted an application with the PSC on June 21, 2021, for rectification of the mistake, but it was not considered, her counsel submitted in court, pointing out that her admit card clearly said she was 90% visually impaired. The court passed an interim order on July 5, 2021, for reserving one post in the physically handicapped (blind) OBC female category. 

During the pendency of the petition, the state sanctioned six supernumerary posts in the blind category on November 30, 2021, in which two were for political science. The state had asked the PSC to send the selection list against these posts, but it had not considered the case of the petitioner. 

Patel’s counsel argued that scribes are provided only when a person is more than 40% disabled, and here the petitioner is 90% blind, which has been certified by the government doctor

On Kerala SCPD's directions, Kerala University decides to permit 100% visually impaired to pursue Science Course

The Academic Council of Kerala University on 16 Sep 2022 has taken a decision to permit 100% visually impaired student to pursue BSc Physics course after an applicant, who had scored 100% marks in the higher secondary examination, was unable to submit her online application for admission and she had to subsequently petition the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities. The SCPD issued an order under provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 directing the Kerala University to do the needful. 

Before the current decision of the academic council, the undergraduate (UG) prospectus of the university has thus far permitted admissions for only visually impaired candidates with less than 40% disability to Science subjects which is contrary to the provisions of the RPWD Act. 

The council factored in various impediments during the discussion, including the low availability of Physics texts in Braille and prominence of practical work in Science subjects. It was decided to extend assistance, including the provision of scribes for regular practical work and examination in laboratories. The number of experiments will also be reduced to one-third of the total that must be completed by a regular student.

It is hoped that this decision will enable more disabled aspirants to pursue higher education, particularly in Science and Mathematics in Kerala University. More Higher Education Institutes need to change their admission norms not to restrict students from admitting in the courses on the basis of their disability. On the contrary, the HEIs should focus on providing reasonable accommodations to applicants and creating a mechanism for such aspiring students to approach the HEI seeking such accommodations. 

The HEIs have to be cautious that they do not lower the course contents but enhance the support systems and better assistive technology solutions. This would be in line with the Accessibility Guidelines and Standards for Higher Education Institutions and Universities June 2022 issued by the University Grants Commission, Ministry of Education, Govt. of India under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016.

Related Source: The Hindu

Delhi HC asks Indian Railways to ensure Free of Charge Human Assistance and Wheelchairs for Travelers with Disabilities on the lines of Delhi Metro

Court: Delhi High Court

Bench:  Hon'ble Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ and  Hon'ble Subramonium Prasad, J. 

Case No. : W.P.(C) 5666/2017

Case Title: Court on its Own Motion Vs. Union of India & Ors 

Date of Order: 16.09.2022

Brief.

The Delhi High Court has asked the Indian Railways to make all possible endeavours to ensure free of charge human assistance and wheelchair are provided to people with disabilitis at its stations on the lines of Delhi Metro. 

"The respondent shall also make all possible endeavours to ensure that free of charge human assistance and wheelchair is provided to differently abled persons", said the bench.

The bench headed by Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma sought a fresh status report from the authorities with regard to an earlier order on reserving some lower berths for persons with disabilities as well as giving free assistance to them, and said such facilities should at least be provided at the busy stations.

Noting that these facilities are being provided by the Delhi Metro as well, the court added the state-run transport behemoth shall certainly make all endeavours to make these available at maximum number of railway stations. It is not a big deal, at least in busy railway stations. At least in the four metros and class A cities it can be provided, the court said.

The order was passed on a PIL initiated by the high court onits own motion in July 2017 after after coming across a news report that the door of a special compartment for the disabled in the Gorakhdham Express was shut, with the result that the visually-impaired man missed his M.Phil entrance exam as he could not board a reserved compartment since it was locked from inside. 

Senior advocate S K Rungta, who has been appearing as amicus curiae (friend of the court) in the matter, told the bench that at this stage not much was required by way of attachment of coaches and reservation of seats for the differently abled but providing free escort and wheelchair was still an issue.

Mincing no words, the court had said it was shocked over complete apathy of the Railways in treating its physically challenged passengers by placing the compartments for the disabled at end of the trains and providing little or no help for access. The court had also said it will explore the possibility of compensation for the youth "who has undergone so much trauma for the callous disregard of his rights."

The matter has been adjourned to 07 December 2022.

Read the Order embeded below:-

Punjab and Haryana HC- Insulting a spouse for his physical disability amounts to mental cruelty for the purpose of seeking divorce

Court:  Punjab and Haryana high court at Chandigarh

Bench:  Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Nidhi Gupta

Case No(s): FAO-M-190 of 2010 (O&M) and FAO No. 3554 of 2016

Case Title: Karamjit Singh Vs. Davinder Kaur

Date of Judgement:  13 September 2022

Act /Law: Matrimonial Dispute/ Divorce matter under section 10,11,12,13,13A & 13B OF Hindu Marriage Act

Brief Synopsis

Mocking and insulting spouse for disability amounts to mental cruelty and the affected party can be granted divorce on this ground, as per the recentl judgement of Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh.

The high court passed the order while allowing an appeal filed by a man whose wife tauntingly called him, a “lula-langra” (a derogatory term used for a physically-challenged person) in front of his family and friends.“There is sufficient evidence on record in form of the above-mentioned testimonies where it is established that the respondent ill-treated the appellant for his handicap. 

"Taunting a person for his handicap constitutes the most inhumane kind of cruelty ,” the bench held,  while allowing an appeal filed by a man from Punjab's Hoshiarpur district against the order dated April 21, 2010, passed by the Hoshiarpur family court, whereby his petition seeking divorce from his wife was dismissed.

The couple was married in March 2004 at Nakodar as per Sikh rites and they had one son later. The appellant husband was disabled as a result of polio during childhood. After around 8-10 days of marriage, his wife started insulting him, mocking him publicly for his physical disability, and tauntingly called him 'lula-langra' in front of his family and friends. She even used to snatch his crutches and physically throw him on the ground in the presence of his friends and relatives. 

As such, the appellant was undergoing tremendous mental agony and trauma, as well as physical abuse. In September 2004, she left the appellant's company and started living with her family. Even their son was born at his in-laws' house. According to the appellant, he tried his best to bring her back, but she never returned. Finally, in 2008, he filed a divorce petition before the family court, which was dismissed. 

In his appeal against the family court's decision, the appellant-husband argued that the lower court had committed a grave error in overlooking the testimonies of these above said witnesses wherein each of them categorically deposed that the respondent used to insult him in their presence and use derogatory words and taunts against him, as well as physically manhandled him and made him a laughing stock due to his physical disability which resulted in mental cruelty to him. The appellant's wife, however, denied all the allegations.

After hearing all the parties the bench observed that it is not in dispute that the parties have been living separately since 2005. Thus, it is a dead marriage for all intents and purposes. Admittedly, all mediation attempts between the parties have failed. Therefore, this marriage is a mere legal fiction surviving only on paper.

The bench also observed that the family court order is silent over the fact that the wife had not just taunted the appellant for his physical handicap, but also pushed him around and threw him on the ground by pulling away his crutches.

"Accordingly, the findings of the Hoshiarpur court in this regard are held to be erroneous and contrary to the evidence on record, and are as such, reversed," observed the HC while granting divorce. The bench, however, has ordered the man to pay an amount of Rs 25 lakh to his wife as a full and final settlement for her and their son's maintenance.

Read the embedded order below: