Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995

61 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

CH. JOSEPHversusTHE TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION & OTHER

2025 INSC 92031 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a driver employed by the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, was found colour‑blind during a routine medical check and was retired on medical grounds without being offered an alternative post. He claimed entitlement to redeployment under Clause 14 of a 1979 Memorandum of Settlement (MOS) executed

DALCO ENGINEERING PRIVATE LTD.versusSHREE SATISH PRABHAKAR PADHYE AND ORS.

2010 INSC 18331 March 2010

The case concerned two writ petitions challenging the termination of a disabled employee by a private limited company and the termination of a contract with a public trust. Both petitioners sought relief under section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation)

MAHESH GUPTA AND ORS.versusYASHWANT KUMAR AHIRWAR AND ORS.

2007 INSC 88030 August 2007Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh issued a circular and an advertisement to fill reserved posts for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and for handicapped persons. Eight general‑category disabled candidates were selected, while a disabled candidate belonging to a reserved category (SC/ST) was not. The Administrative Tribunal

RAJEEV KUMAR GUPTA & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2016 INSC 48230 June 2016Disposed off

The petitioners, who are persons with disabilities (PWD) employed by Prasar Bharati, challenged two Government of India office memoranda that denied them the statutory 3% reservation in identified Group A and B posts when such posts were filled by promotion. The core issue was whether the memoranda, which limited reser

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT, JODHPUR & ANR.versusNEETU HARSH & ANR.

2019 INSC 97829 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan High Court had directed the state to consider a candidate, who had applied for a Civil Judge post as a General category applicant and paid the general fee, for one of the two vacancies reserved for persons with disabilities after she later claimed visual impairment based on a disability certificate showin

SAMBHAVANAversusUNIVERSITY OF DELHI

2013 INSC 36429 May 2013Disposed off

The appellant organisation Sambhavna filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the University of Delhi to introduce bridge and foundation courses, provide accessible reading material, train teachers, and include disability representatives in university bodies for visually impaired students. The University resp

G H RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 68928 October 2021Directions issued

The petitioners, teachers with B.Ed. (Special) and D.Ed. (Special) qualifications, sought a mandamus directing the Union and State governments to appoint regular special teachers for children with special needs (CwSN) in accordance with a 1:5 pupil‑teacher ratio. The Court examined the interplay of the Right of Childre

BEDANGA TALUKDARversusSAIFUDAULLAH KHAN & ORS.

2011 INSC 72128 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Assam Public Service Commission advertised a combined competitive examination with a reservation of 3% for physically disabled candidates. Respondent No.1, a physically disabled applicant, applied under the original advertisement but did not submit the required disability certificate by the stipulated deadline, nor

SUCHITA SRIVASTAVA & ANR.versusCHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION

2009 INSC 108628 August 2009Disposed off

The case concerned a 19‑20‑year‑old woman with mild to moderate mental retardation, an orphan residing in a government welfare home, who became pregnant around the 19th week of gestation after an alleged rape. The Chandigarh Administration sought the High Court’s approval to terminate the pregnancy, invoking the Medica

THE STATE OF KERALA & ORS.versusLEESAMMA JOSEPH

2021 INSC 30928 June 2021Dismissed

The State of Kerala appointed Leesamma Joseph on compassionate grounds despite her 55% locomotor disability and later denied her promotion benefits under the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. The respondent claimed that sections 32, 33 and 47 of the 1995 Act guarantee reservation in promotion for persons with disabi

D. SUDHAKARversusSTATE OF A.P. & ORS.

2016 INSC 27828 March 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, a physically disabled Scheduled Caste officer, claimed that he was denied his statutory 3% reservation under Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 in the short‑listing process for selection to the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) under the Appointment by Selection Regulations, 1997. H

SHARDAversusDHARMPAL

2003 INSC 18928 March 2003Dismissed

The husband filed for divorce under Sections 12(1)(b) and 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking a court order that his wife undergo a medical examination to determine unsoundness of mind. The District Judge ordered the examination, the High Court dismissed the revision, and the wife appealed to the Supreme Cour

JUSTICE SUNANDA BHANDARE FOUNDATIONversusU.0.1. & ANR.

2014 INSC 20926 March 2014Disposed off

The Sunanda Bhandare Foundation filed a writ petition seeking enforcement of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, specifically the 1% reservation for visually disabled persons in university teaching posts under Section 33, and a declaration that den

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusDILEEP KUMAR SINGH

2015 INSC 17126 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Dileep Kumar Singh, a CRPF Assistant Commandant, suffered a permanent spinal injury while on duty and was medically declared 100% incapacitated. He was subsequently relieved from service in July 2011 and challenged the relief under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Partic

SGT CHAMAN LALversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 66225 July 2017Dismissed

The appellant, Sergeant Chaman Lal, a disabled airman classified as medical category A4G4 (P), claimed that he was discriminated against in promotion to Junior Warrant Officer because officers with higher disability percentages were promoted. He relied on Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, arguing i

JUSTICE SUNANDA BHANDARE FOUNDATIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2017 INSC 128425 April 2017Hearing Adjourned

The petitioners sought directions for the Union, State Governments and Union Territories to comply with the Supreme Court's earlier orders on the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, noting that the Act had been repealed and replaced by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The Court examined the legislati

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusM. SELVAKUMAR & ANR.

2017 INSC 7224 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appeals challenged High Court orders that had granted physically‑handicapped candidates belonging to the OBC category three additional attempts in the Civil Services Examination, on the ground that the Government’s policy of increasing attempts for physically‑handicapped candidates of the General category from four

V. SURENDRA MOHANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2019 INSC 7522 January 2019Dismissed

The appellant, a practicing advocate, applied for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) under the partially blind category, submitting a disability certificate showing 70% visual impairment. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPC) had issued a notification, based on a State Government order consulted with t

STATE BANK OF PATIALA & ORS.versusVINESH KUMAR BHASIN

2010 INSC 5422 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Vinesh Kumar Bhasin, a retired officer of State Bank of Patiala, applied for relief under the bank's Exit Option Scheme three days before his statutory retirement and was denied. Claiming disability from a road accident, he alleged discrimination and lodged complaints with the Commissioner and Chief Commissioner for Pe

RAVI AGRAWALversusUNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER

2024 INSC 64820 August 2024Disposed off

Ravi Agrawal filed a writ petition seeking retrospective application of the Finance Act, 2022 amendment to section 80DD of the Income Tax Act, which allows a subscriber to discontinue payments to a Jeevan Adhar scheme upon attaining the age of 60 and to use the accumulated benefit. He argued that the amendment should a

SUDARSHAN RAJPOOTversusU.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

2014 INSC 78818 November 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Sudarshan Rajpoot, a driver employed permanently by the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, suffered grievous injuries in a vehicle accident caused by a mechanical defect. The corporation struck his name off the contract roll, alleging negligent driving, and terminated his services without complying with st

RAJ KUMARversusAJAY KUMAR & ANR.

2010 INSC 70318 October 2010Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a 25‑year‑old roadside cheese vendor, suffered fractures in a motor accident and claimed compensation for loss of future earnings. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded a modest sum, basing the claimant's monthly income on the minimum wage and deducting one‑third for personal expenses, while treatin

RAVINDER KUMAR DHARIWAL & ANR.versusTHE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 91617 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Assistant Commandant in the CRPF, was subjected to multiple disciplinary enquiries after a complaint alleged that he made threatening statements and exhibited misconduct. He was later diagnosed with a permanent mental disability (40‑70%) and classified as unfit for duty. The appellant challenged the d

JAVED ABIDIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 48517 December 1998Case Allowed

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition under Article 32 filed by Javed Abidi seeking full implementation of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The petitioner demanded that Indian Airlines provide aisle chairs, ambulifts, and a 50% fare conc

PAPPU DEO YADAVversusNARESH KUMAR AND ORS.

2020 INSC 55317 September 2020Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a 20‑year‑old data‑entry operator, lost his right hand in a motor‑vehicle accident and claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal assessed his disability at 89% but reduced it to 45% and used a monthly income of Rs 8,000, omitting a 50% addition for future

MS. ZversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 75617 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Ms. Z, a 35‑year‑old destitute woman with mild mental retardation and HIV‑positive status, alleged that she had been raped and sought termination of her 18‑week pregnancy under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971. The government hospital failed to perform the termination, involving the appellant’s father and

MOHAMED IBRAHIMversusTHE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR & ORS.

2023 INSC 91416 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a qualified electrical engineering graduate, was selected for the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) with Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation (TANGEDCO) but was denied appointment after a medical examination revealed mild colour‑vision deficiency. The High Court had directed his appoi

RAJIVE RATURIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 124315 December 2017Disposed off

The petition, filed by a visually disabled individual, sought comprehensive accessibility measures for roads, transport, public buildings, airports, railways, websites and other public facilities. The Court held that the right to accessibility for persons with disabilities is a constitutional right under Articles 19(1)

DISABLED RIGHTS GROUP & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2017 INSC 124415 December 2017Directions issued

The Supreme Court heard a public‑interest writ filed by Disabled Rights Group seeking enforcement of reservation, accessibility and teaching‑facility provisions for persons with disabilities in higher education. The petitioners argued that institutions were not complying with the 3% reservation under the 1995 Disabilit

OMKAR RAMCHANDRA GONDversusTHE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 77515 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a candidate with a 44%/45% speech and language disability, qualified the NEET‑UG 2024 and applied for MBBS admission under the PwD quota. The Designated Disability Certification Centre declared him ineligible based on Appendix H‑1 of the 2019 MCI/NMC regulations, which barred persons with 40% or more dis

GURMEET PAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

2018 INSC 51715 May 2018Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the recruitment process for the Punjab Superior Judicial Service conducted under the 2007 Rules, where candidates appeared for a written test and viva‑voce. The appellants, all General‑category candidates, claimed they were unfairly excluded after the merit list was altered post‑viva, and arg

SIDDARAJUversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2020 INSC 3615 January 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a batch of cases concerning whether persons with disabilities (PWD) are entitled to reservation in promotion under the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. The petitioners argued that the 2005 Office Memorandum limiting reservation in promotion and the principle in Indra Sawhney v. Union of

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusBALI RAM NO. 850808321

2026 INSC 68913 July 2026Dismissed

Bali Ram, a CRPF constable, was medically invalidated in 1998 after developing severe ophthalmic disability. He sought only a disability pension, but the Single Judge invoked Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 and ordered his reinstatement with full service benefits. The Union of India and other CRPF

KUNAL SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2003 INSC 8113 February 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Kunal Singh, a constable in the Special Service Bureau, suffered a severe leg injury that led to amputation and was declared permanently incapacitated. The employer terminated his service, and the High Court dismissed his writ petition. Singh appealed, contending that under Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (

DEAF EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2013 INSC 82812 December 2013Case Allowed

The Deaf Employees Welfare Association and another association filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a mandamus directing the Central and State Governments to grant transport allowance to government employees with hearing impairment, on par with the allowance already given to blind and orthopaedically disabled

REENA BANERJEE AND ANOTHERversusGOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 110112 September 2025Directions issued

The petitioners, a charitable trust and an individual, sought enforcement of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016 to improve conditions in state‑run care homes for persons with cognitive disabilities, citing overcrowding, inadequate health care, abuse and lack of education. The Court examined whethe

JEEJA GHOSH & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 41212 May 2016Case Allowed

Jeeja Ghosh, a person with cerebral palsy, was forcibly de‑boarded from a SpiceJet flight on 19 February 2012 despite having requested assistance only for her baggage. She alleged that the airline’s action violated the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, the Aircraft Rules, 1937, Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) 2008

AMITAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 35311 August 2005Disposed off

The Banking Services Recruitment Board advertised for Probationary Officer posts requiring a graduate degree and age 21‑30. A visually‑impaired applicant, who satisfied both criteria, applied but her application was rejected on the ground that blind candidates were not recruited for the post. She filed a writ petition

UNION OF INDIAversusSANJAY KUMAR JAIN

2004 INSC 43811 August 2004Leave Granted & Dismissed

Sanjay Kumar Jain, a Group‑C employee of Indian Railways, qualified in the written test for promotion to Group‑B but was declared medically unfit (visually handicapped) and denied the viva voce test. He challenged the denial before the Central Administrative Tribunal, which held that refusing promotion on the basis of

BHAWANI PRASAD SONKARversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 20011 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, BHAWANI PRASAD SONKAR, sought a compassionate appointment in the Indian Railways for himself after his father, a Guard Mail/Express, was medically de‑categorised and retired on 30 August 1999 without being offered alternative employment. The Railway Board had issued several circulars governing compassion

DISTRICT REHABILITATION OFFICER AND ORS.versusJAY KISHORE MAITY AND ORS.

2006 INSC 81710 November 2006Disposed off

The Union Government launched a rehabilitation scheme for disabled persons, establishing District Rehabilitation Centres in several states and employing workers on state pay scales. The workers filed petitions before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) claiming they were Central Government employees and sought th

NAWAL KISHORE SHARMAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2021 INSC 7310 February 2021Dismissed

The appellant, a seaman, was engaged on a foreign‑going vessel from 18 September 2009 to 18 June 2010 and was subsequently declared permanently unfit for sea service due to dilated cardiomyopathy. He claimed 100% disability compensation under clause 21 of the National Maritime Board Agreement, arguing that his heart co

MOHAN SONIversusRAM AVTAR TOMAR AND ORS.

2012 INSC 1310 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

Mohan Soni, a cart puller, lost his left leg below the knee in a motor vehicle accident and claimed compensation under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.2,03,400, fixing his disability at 50% based on Schedule 1 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, and the Hi

UNION OF INDIAversusDEVENDRA KUMAR PANT & ORS.

2009 INSC 8959 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Devendra Kumar Pant, a senior research assistant, was promoted to Chief Research Assistant on the condition that he obtain a B‑1 medical fitness certificate, which required colour perception. Pant, already cleared in the lower 82 category (which does not require colour perception), was denied promotion because he could

SHYAM NARAYAN CHOUKSEYversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2018 INSC 149 January 2018Disposed off

Shyam Narayan Chouksey filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking directions to ensure public respect for the National Anthem, including a mandatory requirement that all cinema halls play the anthem before feature films and that audiences stand. The Supreme Court’s interim order of 30 November 2016 imposed such dir

REENA BANERJEE & ANR.versusGOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

2016 INSC 11168 December 2016Disposed off

The petitioners filed a writ petition alleging deplorable conditions at Asha Kiran Home, a Delhi Government-run facility for persons with disabilities, and suggested remedial measures. The Delhi High Court directed a joint meeting, accepted the Government's report of actions taken, and disposed of the petition without

RAJIVE RATURIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 8588 November 2024Directions issued

The petition was filed by Rajive Raturi, a visually‑challenged activist, seeking directions to ensure meaningful access to public spaces for persons with disabilities under the RPWD Act. The Supreme Court had earlier issued eleven action points in 2017, but States and Union Territories showed slow compliance, leading t

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND & ORS.

2013 INSC 6888 October 2013Disposed off

The National Federation of the Blind filed a writ petition seeking enforcement of Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, alleging that the Union failed to provide the mandated 3% reservation for persons with disabilities, especially the blind and low‑vision categories. The High Court directed modificati

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusB. BANERJEE

2013 INSC 5936 September 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, B. Banerjee, a diesel driver medically decategorised in 2005, was posted as a Crew Controller performing permanent stationary duties. He claimed entitlement to the allowance in lieu of kilometreage (ALK) under the Railway Running Allowance Rules, 1981, arguing that his prior status as running staff prot

IN RE: DEA TH OF 25 CHAINED INMATES IN ASYLUM FIRE IN TAMIL NADUversus.

2002 INSC 635 February 2002Disposed off

A tragic fire at a mental asylum in Ervadi, Tamil Nadu, killed 25 chained patients, prompting the Supreme Court to take suo motu action under Article 32. The Court examined the failure of the Central and State governments to implement the Mental Health Act, 1987 and related disability statutes, noting that chaining of

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusG. SARVOTHAMAN

2013 INSC 6744 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a physically handicapped employee of BSNL, had opted for the Telecom Operating Assistant (TOA) cadre after a 1992 restructuring and later applied for promotion under the physically handicapped reservation quota. His claim was rejected, and the Chief Commissioner, exercising powers under Section 59 of th

SALIL CHATURVEDIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2009 INSC 3124 March 2009Disposed off

Saul Chaturvedi filed a public interest writ petition under Article 32 alleging that several State Governments and local authorities had failed to implement Section 43 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, which mandates preferential allotment of

BHAGWAN DASS & ANR.versusPUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

2008 INSC 84 January 2008Case Allowed

Bhagwan Dass, a Class IV lineman of the Punjab State Electricity Board, became completely blind while in service. He wrote a letter explaining his absence and requesting retirement, also asking that his wife be employed in his place. The Board interpreted the letter as a voluntary retirement request and terminated his

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusRAVINDRA KUMAR SHARMA & ORS.

2016 INSC 1293 February 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants obtained disability certificates from a Medical Board under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Rules, 1996 and were selected for a BTC training course reserved for physically handicapped candidates. A complaint by the Bhartiya Viklang Sangh al

GEETABEN RATILAL PATELversusDISTRICT PRIMARY EDUCATION OFFICER

2013 INSC 4182 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a primary school teacher, was dismissed in 2004 under Section 24 of the Gujarat Primary Education Act for alleged absenteeism and misconduct. She suffered a 40‑70% mental disability at the time of dismissal and filed a complaint under Section 62 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Prot

KASHMIRI LAL SHARMAversusHIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD. & ANR.

2025 INSC 4722 April 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a permanently locomotor‑disabled electrician employed by Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board since 1985, was scheduled to retire on 30 September 2018 at age 58. An Office Memorandum dated 29 March 2013 had extended the superannuation age to 60 years for physically disabled employees, but only for th

IN RE: RECRUITMENT OF VISUALLY IMPAIRED IN JUDICIAL SERVICES versus

2025 INSC 3002 March 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether visually impaired candidates are suitable for judicial service and whether recent amendments to the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules (Rule 6A and the proviso to Rule 7) violated constitutional equality and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The Court held that vis

AJAY KUMAR PANDEY & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2022 INSC 7761 August 2022Disposed off

The State of Uttar Pradesh issued a Government Order (G.O.) on 7 May 1999 identifying certain posts for reservation for persons with disabilities, reserving some posts for hearing‑impaired candidates but not for those with locomotor disability. In a recruitment for 1,651 Safai‑Karmis posts, three percent of vacancies w

PRADIP KUMAR MAITYversusCHINMOY KUMAR BHUNIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 3731 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant, a 60% hearing‑impaired candidate, secured the first merit for a Group ‘D’ non‑teaching post in a West Bengal school and was appointed, but the second‑ranked respondent challenged the appointment on the ground that the appellant had exceeded the prescribed upper age limit. The appellant claimed entitlemen

NEERUPAM MOHAN MATHURversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.

2013 INSC 3811 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Neerupam Mohan Mathur, lost his right hand in a bus‑truck collision caused by the negligent driver of a chartered bus. He claimed compensation under Section 110‑A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.3,20,000. The Punjab & Haryana High Court enhanced the awar

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search