Vw' $rn trmrrn rm nqrilci,

{rqeTI;I H-*Ft{q++ ffiffi 3i{ q-{n f{qFr

oritp: p51737y;9.fi .,r aq. / zol: I qd-z / O aa $X t C u-agr, ft-r.io, OLlo gbo I g

srw fuqrqpqa (fudr 6+ffi utro)7gq sTffi oTffi.sq-w fulq/ ft.m,/ E$,/1;dotq g-c4.,t /erl.<er$ €errr/qieTFm €{qq I

frqq: rlrafiq g-titq qrfia-q d ffiq s-6'{q €Eqr t-c ffAcrq (S)243/2oos d ftn rrt ftt{rI o1 qrc+ tg fu{r{tq WEfl/+ed-r/gfrdrr+r,zsrffi+o (trriqf et kqil|_s{Zfrv}q+.q-w o1 garrr d ergw (fuily accessibte) rqrt qri ER-q f

€qd, r. ftirlo, fr*s +,?rs{ d q*b. : gqro(r) /fr.fu.d.720rc/zastfrqio : 20022018 I

z. gw sfuo d qrro gms(a+s)/oorr /rech,,/zot4//patt-t/ t/2844s/2o1s ftqio : ra.oz.zors I

sq0-m lffin qn-ffq qda Rrrrrrcrq, Tg ftd t fuameft{ e-f,{"rriwr ftc fi-A"E (fr) 2$/2oos, ir-tro rgg Tflq' di-fi ds gtr€ur dfuqi.rwc aTDEtr 3Tfuhqq, zoro +t qrc+ ig ft{vr q-ffi frd.r-n t GAyrdsE$ q51l q q, q-q qqEq 3{ri{r @t) I sfi ftffi d rq d erws{nTft frqrqtZfur+Zddq/rm+tq sqm'rifZwrqoens *iten-qtZ*e{Fm*i{err-{f '{cqrR ai .rq-+ WsZd-ed-s/cfrrilsZ€rffi{6 (ffrnqi o)ft-qirqqZffiq d.q-m-{ qffi of gernr d er-5rs'v (fu[y accessibte) fu-orqrcr orEltrd t r

{fl €iiq q Td t T€q sfuq d sqi-fi riEFfd qri+. ftniq: 1s.e2.2e15 gfu= {qr-, d er5ux frrTr-ftffi (etew, wcno, UMG and w3C guidetines) o13t-5qd{r gfrRqf, 6-{i d ftftT sqn ffi.rd t @E xia.q t) r

qcr: qrrftq rrqtq qrqraq, r-g ftEdr arr ftisr-qrur qrfl gftR-+o of t

€aE': gEfdffirjqnl(

ftfff o1 q'r-dqr

rgs erm-t vfuo gs oTtgffi

t.

VX $ir*erq H*.DN

rpNriiairih&ramriwrrwr {d{r ddFl-d gth dilT fttTIlT

I

m-qio: rs(zgz)re.fr./do./zots/qd-z/ Ot-SSalZnf I arqq, Ho ' @)o7lUtc.

sfrftft ftq o,.I qrnpf si oner{6 o,rffi & nfra t1. srl-kT 3Thftffi 5€q efuq/qTs YIRI=T qfuq/{ns{ efu-qZq'c{r'ftq

en-gm7fr'Rrc vtrcl=T qfuq I

2. Frfr sfuq, e-grq q-rsq Hfuq, qq'rI ffiFr+t 1rq €qR ftqFT, iilqg{ I

3. rrq qil{r ft--AH GTffi, {r$q q++-f+Art dq, ws., qfuqroq, sqgq I

4. frtqrm, Efu zfq-s{, Tlurt€II=I, sqgq I

s. ftAqro ilo--ffi, {rso1q E-q\ qffit-q fufra-s (nrsr), fqqT ?rf,{, qqw I

6. rtrrr<r fflTr{fl-q +sd olErorfi, (erf,Orz 1Me) t

7. HrrkT qffiqi-r r,Trt 3TBorft, Dolr&c/RlsL, uqgq 1

B. qqrft GIffi, RSDC/Bhamashah Data Centre/DR Site, DolT&C, vu5/Eil-ug{ I

e. srrw oTfrfuffi fr-{vro7fu-wu \'fl-frr€ (qgffi FriYr6)/q-{ft-E-6q-etnq-{ (w fttw-o)/*qm(,

l_GTr{_dNqr. ffi1doffi ft_ier_6 \qqgffi YINI=I Hfue

ilEHEITdT ?RS'H

ft*encq-q fr*q *rqu-dEft an u, zlwrr6.{ 6}zm A trB, frtfr-d mr&, c-qg[

trflio : um r o(r)&.ft.q).leor g/ $,ltx3 i,r,;r,.i..i,i;r,i..::,

..,n . , ,,1 :.,,i.,:,:?i: kdim ,?"nlul tg

s{Pdftffi gw *fto,{d-dr mqdF*1 r,ti ?i?Tu ftarur, 'r.1fffi.rysqgr I

ftqq,- am-#q s-da dleuerq, a{ nr* d ftrdrne}a u?F-{ur d?Hr sntei

ftai6 ftz dfferd (?ft.) z$t2oos, zr#s rg$, Git-fl {Bqa 3tr6

EF-sqT fr B& ar$ BTeil ent qrca-ar gBftaa azi qrnd r

fl&f,q,

wfrrr frq-cntrrdfa arrd#q ?r-dl-d Eqrqt?Er, at fm fr ft*.rilfi-d rdr[ur d?srfte fr8)era (?ft.) 2$t200s, tr-#{ ES, ffina qFqa sfr EFsqT fr ffirr-ordeiltroru 3rf}ftffifr 2016 +t qro-ar tg fr{e, ma ffi ad t1 gd?T h{eil fr s{rr$ftairo HRT fr-rargrlru uFffi srtf}ra B'-

tviii) Comprehensive revision of*targ.gt deadliness under accessi-bilitv of knowlellge

and ICT Ecosystem. At least 50% of.,centf-al F.I-d state eovt. website are to meet

2AL7. At least 5O% of the public documents

me..et accessibilitv Standards bv March.?018.

On this action point, the petitioner has sought five 86 directions. Again, there

cannot be any dispute that such provisions have to be made as Disabilities Act, 2016

itself mandates that. The only question is about the time schedule. On certain aspects,

had itself mentioned the target date. ln any case, let there be a study undertaken

in this behalf as well by the Union of lndia and report be filed within three months

tating as to by what date(s) compliance shall be made. 1:*rrh- :eav""75

3n: ssfdilrgsr ft-erd t b ara-#q rfita @r{ml-q, a$ eA EEr k& ar}

frteil of qrffir gtsfiaa 6'errirr qrrft frq}d hten-cm o1 f}s-dr} irr sra 6zrA,

aTfu qmal ftfr8 S ard#q a-da aurentrcr, C frrcd 61 frEftfr frftI t {d$crrrd tF"filrqr mr UrS r

effifqr

ii :1.

**-^*...

Desktop/Nandkishor/N idesha laylLetter

Q&-e.t tx(3ryrffr qRind)

i..

f>?K:ItS'7

fttero

79

ITEM NO.1501 COI'RT NO.6 SECTION PIL-W(FOR JI'DGMENI )

SUPREME COURT OE INDIARECORD OF PROCEEDII{GS

writ Petitiort(s) (Civi].) No(s). 243/2OOs

RAJM RATITRI Petitioner (s)

\/ERSUS

UNION OE INDIA & ORS. Respondent (s)

( IHEjARD BY : HON. A. K. SIKRI AnrD I{ON. ASHOK BHUSEAN, JJ. I )

WITHw.P. (c) No. 22A/2006 (PIL-W)

\i/ Date : 15-12-2017 These petitions were calJ.ed on for pronouncementof judgment today.

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Baij Nath Patel, Adv.Ms. Sweta, Adv.Ms - Rornila, Adw.Mr . V. N. Rag"upati . Adv .

Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR

For Respondent (s) Mr. .rugal Kishore Gilda, Adw. GeneralM!. Aniruddha P. Mayee / AORM!. Chirag Jain, Adv.

Mr. K.V. ,fagdishwaran, Adw.Ms. G. Indira, AOR

Mr. Edward Be1ho, AAGMr. K. E.Sema, Adv.Mr. Anit Kumar singh, Adv.Mr. K. Luikang Michael, Adv.

Mr. Milind Kumar, AoR

Mr . ,rog'y Scaria, AOR

Mr. M. Yogesh , AOR

Ms. Ber[antika wahi, AoRMs. Jesa]. wahi, Adv.Ms. Mamta Singh, Adw.

Ms. Aruna Mathur, Adv.

80

Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Adw.Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adw.Ms . simran .feet. Adv.M/S. Arputham Aruna And Co, AOR

Mrs. Niranjana singh, AoR

Mrs. D. Bharathi Reddy, AoR

M!. Ratan Kumar Choudhuri, AOR

Mr. Rajesh Srivastava, AOR

Mr. R.R. Rajesh, Adv.Mr- Raj Bahadur, Adv.

Mr. P. V. Yogeswaran, AOR

Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AoR

Ms. K. Enato]'i Sema, AOR

M!. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR

Mrs. Anj.I Katiyar, AOR

Mr. Kamini Jaiswal, AoR

Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR

Mr. Anil shrivastav, AoR

Mr. Raj singh Rana, AoR

Mr. M. shoeb AIam, AoRMs. Fauzia Shakil , Adv.Mr. UjjwaL Singh, Adv.Mr. Mojahid Karim Khan / Adv.

M!. .ratinder Kunar Bhatia, AoRM.r. Mukesh Verna, Adv.

M!. Kuldip singh, AOR

Mr. ttitesh Kurar Sharma, Adw -

Mr. T.V. Talwar, Adv.

Ms. Narmada, Adv.M!. chancttal Kumar Ganguli, AoR

Ms. Diksha Rai, AoR

Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR

8l

Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv.Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.Mr. Pranab Prakash, Adv.Mr. Shivam Singh, Adv.Mr. Aditya Raina, Adw.Mr. Shreyas Jain, Adv.Mr. Kurnar Milind, Adv.Ms. Arnbika Gauta.m, Adv.

Mr. S.S. Shamshery, AAGMr. Amit Sharma, Adv.Mr. Ankit Raj, Adv.Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv.Mr. Sandeep Singh, Adv.Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR

Mr. M. T. George, AOR

Mrs. B. Sunita Rao, AOR

Mr. V. K. Verma, AOR

Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR

M/S. Corporate Law Group, AOR

Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, AOR

Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR

Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, AOR

Mr. AniJ. Grover, Adv.Mr. Piyush Hans, Adv.Mr. Satish Kapoor, Adv.Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, AOR

Mr. V. G. Pragrasan, AOR

Mr. T. Mahipal, AOR

Mr. Mishra Saurabh, AOR

Mr. Gopal Prasad, AOR

Ms. Susmita LaI, AOR

Mr. Sudarshan Singh Rawat, AOR

Mr. M. R. Shamshad, AOR

sri*

.82

Mr. C. K. Sasi, AOR

Mr. Nishant Ranakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR

Mr. B. S. Banthia, AOR

Honrble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri pronounced the judgment of ttre

Bench coml)rising Hj.s Lordshj-p and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok

Bhushan.

The writ petitions disposed of with the following

directions:

(i) Makinq 20-50 important crovernment bui1dinos in 50 cj.ties ful1vaccessib].e DeceDber 2017 (State Govt. euildinqs)

Since, this dead1ine is set by the AIC itself, this

should be met. In any case, as per ttre provisions

of Section 46 of the Disabilities Act, 2016, aII

covernment buildings providing any services to the

public are to be made fully accessible by irune. 2019

whictr has to be adhere to.

(ii) Makinq 50$ of a1I the oovt. buildinqs of the national capitaland a]']. the state capitals fu11v accessible bw Decenber 2018.

Though the deadline for identifying the buildings

was fixed as February 2A, 2Ot1 , accolding to status

report dated August 8, 2OL7 , only seven states ltave

identified the buildings. Remaining states are

dilected to identify the buildings by February 28,

2018 and it is made clear ttrat no further tiEe in

83

this beha1f shalI be granted. Insofar as deadJ.ine

for retrofitting is eoncerned, the work should be

comp].eted by Decenber, 2018.

(iii) Comp].etinq accessibilj.tv audit of 50t of oovt. buildinas andmakina them fu].lv accessib1e in 10 most important cities,/towns ofstates/UTs not' coveled in talqets (i) and (ii) bv Deceuber 2019-

( iv)

Position regarding this action point is the sane as

noted in respect of action point 2, namely, onJ.y

seven States trave 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 coml)lete accessibility audit of 50t of

Gowerrunent bui].dings in these cities/towns by

February 2A, 2OLA. L!.kewise, retrofitting of these

be coBpleted by Deceuber 2019 as per the revised

deadline set out by CCC.

Central cowt - bui1dinos -

llaving regard to ttre comments given by the

petitioner in i.ts affidavit dated August 23, 2OL7 on

ttris aspect, time flame of August, 2018 is given for

coml)].etj-ng this target.

(v) Accessibilitv in airports. Comp].etino accessibilitv audit ofall the international airports and makinq ttrem fulIv accessiblebv DeceEber 2015 .

The demand of the petitioner that Civil Aviation

Ministry should follow the prescribed template i.e.

(vi )

84

IIf Roorkee teEPlate on the Government website

appears to be justified which should be imp].enented

as expeditiously aE Possible. The Union of India

should theleafter conduct tshe accessibility and

audit and upload the same on the website by June,

2018.

Accessibilitv in Raitgravs. Ministrw of Raihravs wasrequired to make all A1 , A and B cateqorv railwav slations fullvaccessi.ble bv Julv 2016. 50* of all rai-lwav stations to madeful1w accessible bv March 2018.

As is clear from the affidawj.t dated June 30, 2017

filed by the petitioner, as many as 12 directj-ons

are sought under this action Point. Insofar as

prowiding of warious facilities in the railwaY

stations are concerned, wtrj.ch are listed by the

petj-tioner, there cannot be any disPute that the

Indian railways is statutorily obligated to make

those prowisions. The petitioner has, trowever,

sought time bound directions for l)roviding such

faci]'ities. I{herewer the prowisions of the

Dj.sabilities Act, 2016 prescribe the dead1ines, the

respondent is to provide ttrose faeilities within

ttrose time framework. Insofar as ottrer facilities

ale concelned, in respect of whictr the Petitioner

wants ttrose facilities by specified period, we are

not fixing suctr a period. Instead, lve direct that

the appropriate/competent authority in the railways

sha1l make an assessnent .in this behalf so as to

85

byascertain as to what date (s) these facilities

l,i]'L be plovided. Such a study can be undertaken

and exercisa be coEp].et€d within a perj-od of ttrree

months and report in that beha].f sha1l be filed in

the Court, chalkj.ng out the progressive p1an.

(wii) 10t of coverrrpent owned public transport carriels are tobe made full'r accessibl€ bv March 2018.

Here again, Section 41 of the Disa.bilities Act, 2016

provides for conpretrensiwe accessibility in all

modes of trartspolt including but not renitted to the

bus transport. Therefore, it becoEes the duty of

ttre Union, States as rre1l as Union Te!]citories to

ensure that aII Govern[ent buses disabled

friendly in accordance with the Harmonized

Guide].ines. lj-kewise/ the respondents are duty

bound to see that private buses a]'so becoue disabled

friend].y. Thus, we direct ttre covelnEent to 1ay

down the plan giving the dates by rrhich the

aforesaid task shall be undertaken, keeping in view

the directions which are sought by the petitioner in

this behalf and the sarne sl.a]-]. be fi].ed wittrin thlee

months -

{2,/ (wiii) comprehensive revision of tarqet deadliness underaccessibilitv of know].edqe and IcT Ecosvstem. At ].east 50* ofcentral and state qovt- websites are to peet accessibilitvstandards bv March 2017. At least 50* of the pub1ic documentsare to meet accessibilitv standards bv March 2018.

On this action point, the petitioner tras sougtrt fiwe

86

directions. Again, there cannot be any disPute that

such provisions ttave to be made as Disa.bilities Act,

2016 itself mandates that. Bhe on].y question is

about the time schedul-e. on certain asPects, AIC

had itself mentioned the target date. In any case,

1et there be a s tudy undertaken in this behalf as

well by the Union of India and lePort be filed

within three months stating as to by what date(s)

corrpliance stra].l be made.

Bureau of Indian standards to eEbed disalrilitv aspect in

the

(ix)a].]. re].evant Darts of rewised Natioja1 E!ri!.di!.s- !g=

It is exPected that the resPondents would regrrlarly

uPdate the HarDonized Guidelines keeping in view the

Provisj.ons of Disabilities Act, 20LG and

tectrnologica]. adwancement vis-i-vis the needs of

persons with disa.bi.].ities .

(x) The tarcret of traininq additional 200 sj-on lanquaoei.nterpleters bv March 2018.

Needful be' done in this behalf as well wj"thin

reasonable time and the Government is directed to

file an affidavit within ttrree months stating the

time period within which the same can be

acconPlished.

(xi) As l)er the Provisions of sections 60 and 56 of

Disabilities Act, 2Of6, alJ. States and Union Telritories

required to constitute the Centlal and Slate Advisory Boards. In

87

order to effectiweJ.y iBpleEent the prowisions of ttre said Act, it

becornes ttre duty of the States and Union Territories to

constitute such Adwisory Boards. Iherefore, we dj.rect ttrese

Advisory Boards to be constituted by a]-l States and Union

Territories within a period of thlee months from today.

29. Matter be listed for directions afte! ttrree months on

receiving rel)orts in terms of the aforesaid orde!. In the

reports to be filed. the respondents shall al.so state the

foI1ow-up action taken during ttre intervening period in the

meantime -

Pending applj.cation (s) ,

accordingJ.y.

if any, stands disposed of

(Ashwani Thakur)COI,RT Ii{ASTER

(Signed reportable

(Ma1a KuDari Sharma)COURT I4ASTER

judgment is placed on the file)