IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION)

C.W.J.C. No._______________ OF 2021

In the matter of an
application under Article
226 of the Constitution of
India 
AND 
In the matter of:

Adil Abbas, Aged about 21 years, Male, S/o- Syed Arshad

Abbas, R/o- Usman Nagar, Nohsa, Post-Phulwarisharif,
Police Station-Phulwarisharif, District- Patna, Bihar-801505
…Petitioner
Versus
1. The state of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Main
Secretariat, Bailey Road, Patna-800001
2. Additional Chief Secretary, Disaster Management
Department, Government of Bihar, 2nd Floor, Pant
Bhawan, Near Indra Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna, Bihar
800001
3. Chairperson, District Disaster Management Authority cum
District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bihar
4. Chief Engineer, Flood Control and Water Drainage Cell,
Water Resources Department, Muzaffarpur, Bihar
5. Sub Divisional Officer,_____________sub division, West
Champaran, Bihar
6. Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, West
Champaran, Bihar
 …Respondents
To, 
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, the Chief Justice of the
High Court of Judicature at Patna and His Companion Justices of
the said Hon’ble Court. 
Humble petition on behalf of the
Petitioner above named. 

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -

1. The present Public Interest Litigation (P.I.L.) is being filed before

this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
the following reliefs:

i. For issuance of an appropriate writ of

Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to make the railway building
of Patna Station, Punpun Station,
Patliputra Station, Danapur Station, Ara
Station and Rajendra Nagar Station
accessible by adopting ramp approach, and
the slope of the ramp should be between
1:15 and 1:20, which is considered as
standard ramps.
ii. For issuance of an appropriate writ of
Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to build ramps on foot-over
bridge with proper hand rails at Patna
Station, Punpun Station, Patliputra Station,
 Danapur Station, Ara Station and Rajendra
Nagar Station with slant between 1:15 and
1:20, which is considered as standard slant
or ramp.
iii. For issuance of an appropriate writ of
Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to reserve at least 15% of
total parking space in Patna Station,
Punpun Station, Patliputra Station,
Danapur Station, Ara Station and Rajendra
Nagar Station fir physically challenged
person’s vehicle.
iv. For issuance of an appropriate writ of
Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to make a separate drop-off
zone in Patna Station, Punpun Station,
Patliputra Station, Danapur Station, Ara
Station and Rajendra Nagar Station for
physically challenged person which should
be nearest to the ramps of the entry gate.
v. For issuance of an appropriate writ of
Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to make build seperate
assistance counter at Patna Station, Punpun
Station, Patliputra Station, Danapur
Station, Ara Station and Rajendra Nagar
Station for challenged person, which
 should be equipped with adequate amount
of walker, wheel chair, and white cane.

vi. For issuance of an appropriate writ of

Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to build disabled friendly and
disabled accessible ticket counters
specially for the physically challenged
person at Patna Station, Punpun Station,
Patliputra Station, Danapur Station, Ara
Station and Rajendra Nagar Station.

vii. For issuance of an appropriate writ of

Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to build disabled friendly and
disabled accessible water booth at the
platforms of Patna Station, Punpun Station,
Patliputra Station, Danapur Station, Ara
Station and Rajendra Nagar Station.

viii. For issuance of an appropriate writ of

Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to build disabled friendly and
disabled accessible toilets at the platforms
of Patna Station, Punpun Station,
 Patliputra Station, Danapur Station, Ara
Station and Rajendra Nagar Station.

ix. For issuance of an appropriate writ of

Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to reserve 15% of total
waiting area for physically challenged
person in existing waiting hall of Patna
Station, Punpun Station, Patliputra Station,
Danapur Station, Ara Station and Rajendra
Nagar Station.
x. For issuance of an appropriate writ of
Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to ensure that physically
challenged person should be treated on
priority in canteen of Patna Station,
Punpun Station, Patliputra Station,
Danapur Station, Ara Station and Rajendra
Nagar Station.
xi. For issuance of an appropriate writ of
Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to ensure that Patna Station,
Punpun Station, Patliputra Station,
Danapur Station, Ara Station and Rajendra
Nagar Station should be properly signage
with braille, warning boards and tactile
paving.
 xii. For issuance of an appropriate writ of
Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)
or order(s) or direction(s) commanding the
Respondents to provide folding ramps for
orthopedically challenged person to board
on the train at platforms of Patna Station,
Punpun Station, Patliputra Station,
Danapur Station, Ara Station and Rajendra
Nagar Station.
AND/OR
xiii. Pass any other Order(s) or direction(s) in
the best interest of the challenged people
who are affected by the negligence of the
respondent authorities.
2. That the present Public Interest Litigation (PIL) may be allowed on the
following main grounds.

GROUNDS

A. Whether the inaccessibility of railway station

is violation of fundamental right to life
enshrined under article 21 of Constitution of
India or not?
B. Whether the inaccessibility of railway station
is violation of fundamental right to move
freely throughout the territory of India
enshrined under article 19(1)(d) of
Constitution of India or not?
 C. Whether the inaccessibility of railway station
is violation of fundamental right to equality
before law enshrined under article 14 of
Constitution of India or not?
D. Whether the negligence on the part of
Respondent Authorities in incorporating
measures provided under Rights of person
with Disabilities Act, 2016, and Guidelines
for standards of Accessibility promulgated by
Ministry of Railway, Government of India, is
violation of article 38 of Constitution of India
or not?
E. Whether the negligence on the part of
Respondent Authorities in incorporating
measures provided under Rights of person
with Disabilities Act, 2016, and Guidelines
for standards of Accessibility promulgated by
Ministry of Railway, Government of India, is
violation of article 41 of Constitution of India
or not?
3. That the Petitioner is a citizen of India and he is a resident of Usman
Nagar, Nohsa, Post-Phulwarisharif, Police Station-Phulwarisharif,
District- Patna, Bihar-801505. He is working in the welfare and best
interest of his district, as well as the neighboring districts. He has
written several letters to call upon an action for the implementations of
measures and facilities, given under Rights of Persons with Disbilities
Act, 2016, in schools of Patna Region, to various authorities of Bihar,
but no actions were taken by the respondent authorities.
4. That the Petitioner as well as the Respondent Authorities are amenable
to the Writ Jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.
5. That the instant writ petition is being filed as a Public Interest
Litigation by the petitioners and as such it has no vested interest in the
instant writ application.
6. That the Petitioner have no other effective and efficacious remedy than
to move to your lordships by way of filing this Public Interest
Litigation Petition for redressal of the grievances.
7. That the Petitioner have not moved earlier before this Hon’ble court in
this matter.
8. That the present PIL requires urgent attention of this Hon’ble Court as
it is a petition filed in the public interest to espouse the physically
challenged persons who are likely to suffer because of the negligence
of authorities in implementing the measures given under Rights of
Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. This PIL seeks the proper
implementation of measures and facilities which are essential for the
accessibility of railways for the physically challenged persons.
Brief Facts of the Case
9. That the disability is the social evil which bifurcates the society into
two resulting in discrimination, eventually resulting the decrease in
growth of a nation. To overcome with this evil, United Nation
Organization proclaimed Convention on Rights of Persons with
Disabilities, which was signed and ratified by Government of India in
the form of “Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016” herein
referred as RPWD Act, 2016.
10.That the unfortunate reality for persons living with disabilities in the
State of Bihar is that they still lag behind many when it comes to
getting proper and adequate access to public places as the state is not
catering the needs of persons living with disabilities by providing them
user-friendly and barrier free environment. Their ‘disability’ is often
seen as their ‘inability’ by many and the society in general have
preconceived notions about their capabilities which eventually leads to
 discrimination, harassment and isolation of persons living with
disabilities from mainstream.
11.That section 41 of RPWD Act, 2016, articulates that the appropriate
government should take every possible steps to make the public
transports accessible to the physically challenged persons, including
railway station and trains.
12.That on 22.07.2019, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in PIL, passed
an order directing the railway to make the railway stations and train
more accessible for the physically challenged person.
13.That on 12.02.2020, the Ministry of Railway, Government of India,
promulgate harmonized guidelines for making the railways more
accessible for the physically challenged person, which has not been
implemented yet in the many station established in Bihar long time
ago, because on the negligence on the part of respondent authorities.
14.That the petitioner filed RTIs seeking authentic information from
Ministry of Railways, which was pathetic and kind of misleading when
comparing to ground report.
15.That the following table has been inserted for the ready reference of

this Hon’ble Court which contains the name of divisions and the

information sought under Right to Information Act, 2005 by the

Petitioner organization for all across the State.

Name of Divisions Information Sought Under Right to

Information Act, 2005

I. East Central Railway-Danapur  How many wheel chairs are

Division there.

II. East Central Railway-  How many trained personnel

 Samastipur Division are there to assist physically

III. Eastern Railway- Maldah disabled.

Division  How many disabled friendly

IV. East Central Railway- Sonpur toilets are there.

Division  How many disabled friendly

ticket counters are there.

 How many signages are there

for the physically disabled.

 How many disabled friendly

water taps are there.

 How many disabled friendly

ramps are there.

 What the slant of the ramp and

what is the prescribed slant by

the government.

16.That according to a R.T.I reply Ref.No ECRDN/R/E/2020/00215

Dated 16.11.20 received from East Central Railways, Danapur states
the following information.
17. Item no. Information

1. 03 wheelchairs are available.

2. 01 trained personnel are there to assist physically

disabled.

3. 01 - Disabled friendly toilets.

4. 01 disabled friendly ticket counters.

5. 03 no. of disabled friendly water taps.

6. 02 o. of ramps are available.

That according to a R.T.I reply Ref.No- ERMLD/R/E/20/00218 Dated

16.11.20 received from East Central Railways, Malda states the
following information:-

Item no. Information

1. 02 wheelchairs are available.

2. 0 trained personnel are there to assist physically disabled

3. 01 disabled friendly toilets

4. 01 disabled friendly ticket counters

5. 02 signages for physically disabled

6. 02 disabled friendly water taps

18. 7. 02 disabled friendly Ramps

8. 1:12 the slant of the ramp

That according to a R.T.I reply Ref.No- ECRMS/R/E/00184/ Dated

16.11.20 received from East Central Railways, Gaya states the
following information:-
 Item no. Information

1. 07 wheelchairs are available.

2. 0 trained personnel are there to assist physically disabled

3. 04 disabled friendly toilets

4. 02 disabled friendly ticket counters

5. 03 signages for physically disabled

6. 08 disabled friendly water taps

7. 05 disabled friendly Ramps

19.
8. 05 number of slant of the ramp

That according to a R.T.I reply Ref.No- ECRSP/R/E/20/00204/ Dated

17.11.20 received from East Central Railways, Samastipur states the
following information:-

Item no. Information

1. 04- wheelchairs are available.

2. 17- trained personnel are there to assist physically

disabled

3. 03- disabled friendly toilets

4. 01- disabled friendly ticket counters

5. 06 - signage for physically disabled

6. 03- disabled friendly water taps

7. 06- disabled friendly Ramps

20.That according to a R.T.I reply Ref.No- ECRSD/R/E/20/00277/ Dated
17.11.20 received from East Central Railways, Samastipur states the
following information:-

21. Item no. Information

01 04 wheelchairs are available.

02 17 trained personnel are there to assist physically

disabled

03 04 disabled friendly toilets

04 01 disabled friendly ticket counters

05 06 signages for physically disabled

06 03 disabled friendly water taps

07 06 disabled friendly Ramps

08 05 number of slant of the ramp

It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the R.T.I reply
clearly depicts the adverse condition of railways for persons with
disability, most of the railway station have zero to handful of
wheelchairs and no trained personnel to attend them, most of the
railway station do not have adequate ramps with prescribed slant which
makes it extremely hard for persons with disability to access or
sometimes even enter the railway station. The prevailing condition of
inharmonious infrastructure is not only limited to the Indian railways
but also any public transport in the state of Bihar.
22.That even the access for clean drinking water and toilets in railway
stations is denied, because the infrastructure for the same is not
 disabled friendly. On the contrary section 45 of the rights of persons
with disabilities Act, 2016 provides for time-limits (not exceeding 5
years) for making existing infrastructure and premises accessible while
section 44 casts obligation on all kinds of establishments i.e.,
government as well as private establishments to mandatorily observe
accessible norms while building any structure despite the rule of the
land Bihar railways still struggles to provide bare minimum to the
persons with disability.
23.It is further relevant to mention here that in addition to the RTI’s the
Petitioner has also conducted a fact finding visit to different railway
station establishment in the capital city of the state i.e., Patna and has
made a fact finding assessment report which clearly highlights that
proper user-friendly and barrier free environment are still non-existent
at different railway stations in and around Patna.
24.That the petitioner organization has managed to click the photographs
of the establishments who have yet to comply with the provisions of
the Rights with Disability Act and the following data has been inserted
for the purpose of convenience, which contains names of the railways
stations in and around Patna where the free accessibility for differently
abled has been disdained.
S.No Railway Stations visited for the purpose of fact finding in
and around Patna City.
1. Patna Junction
2. Rajendra Nagar Terminal
3. Danapur Junction
4. Patliputra Junction
5. PunPun
6. Patna Saheb
7. Ara
25.That the said fact finding was conducted keeping in mind the revised
guidelines of Indian Railways ‘on passenger amenities for
passenger/persons with disabilities’ in different heads which are as
follows:
a. Disabled friendly parking.
b. Drop-off zone for physically challenged person.
c. Ramp approach to building of railway station.
d. Ramp for foot-over Bridge.
e. Disabled friendly ticket counter.
f. Disabled friendly toilets.
g. Disabled friendly water booth.
h. Assistant counter for physically challenged person.
i. Facility and reservation in waiting hall.
j. Disabled friendly canteen area.
k. Equipment for physically challenged person.
l. Signage in railway stations.
26.That the results of fact finding report was terrible. The Patna railway
station lacks ramps. The ramp for foot-over bridge is no use for the
challenged person because slant of existing ramps is very high, video
of the same has been recorded by the petitioner. Ticket Counter at
Patna Railway station is constructed at 1 st floor which can be
approached only by using stairs which again is not disabled friendly.
There is zero disabled friendly toilets and washrooms at Patna railway
station. The Patna railway station lacks of signage as well, which again
is dangerous for the blind persons.
27.That the Danapur railway station and Rajendra Nagar Railway station
does not have ramps for approaching railway building and foot-over
bridge. They don’t have disabled friendly parking, or drop-off zone for
physically challenged person. There is no ramps to approach ticket
counter. There are zero disabled friendly toilets and water-booth which
 is clear violation of Fundamental right to life enshrined under article 21
of Constitution of India. It lacks of proper signage as well. There is no
assistance counter for disabled persons.
28.That the Patliputra station which is newly constructed after the
enactment of RPWD Act, 2016, lack of ramp approach, which is very
awful. It does not have disabled friendly toilets and water-booth, which
is a part of fundamental right to life. There are no ramps to access the
foot-over bridge. Right to food is a fundamental right under article 21
of Constitution of India, but the physically challenged person cannot
access the canteen area of the railway stations because of lack of
accessibility which is violating their fundamental right.
29.That the Punpun station and Ara station is also inaccessible for the
physically challenged persons, because they also lack ramps for
approaching buildings and foot-over bridge. They also do not have
disabled friendly washrooms and water-booth which again is violation
of fundamental right to life.
30.The detailed fact finding report has been inserted as table for the
convenience.
 Amenities Patna JN PUNPUN Patliputra Danap Ara Rajendra
ur Nagar
Disabled Drop off No No No No No No
Zone
Disabled Parking No No No No No No
Signage No No No No No No
Disabled friendly No No No No No No
Ramp Approach
to buildings
Disabled Friendly No No No No No No
Ramped
Approach to foot-
over bridge
Disabled Friendly No No No No No No
Ticket Counter
Disabled Friendly No No No No No No
Toilets
Disabled Friendly No No No No No No
Canteen Area
Assistant No No No No No No
Counters(PWD)
Disabled Friendly No No No No Yes No
Water Booth
Waiting No No No No No No
Room(PWD)

31.That the Disability Act, 2016 has introduced provisions pertaining to

transport which are still not being complied with and such provisions

relate to the sphere of access to transport, information, communication

technology and promotion of development and production and

distribution of universally designed consumer products and accessories

for general use for persons with disabilities. For the purpose of

convenience, the text of Section 41 is produced hereunder:

“.….41. Access to transport-

{1) The appropriate Government shall take suitable

measures to provide, -

(a) facilities for persons with disabilities at bus

stops, railway stations and airports

conforming to the accessibility standards

relating to parking spaces, toilets, ticketing

counters and ticketing machines;

{b) access to all modes of transport that

conform the design standards, including

retrofitting old modes of transport, wherever

technically feasible and safe for persons with

disabilities, economically viable and without

entailing major structural changes in design;

{c) accessible roads to address mobility

necessary for persons with disabilities.

(2) The appropriate Government shall develop

schemes programmes to promote the personal

 mobility of persons with disabilities at

affordable cost to provide for, -

(a) incentives and concessions;

(b) retrofitting of vehicles; and

(c) personal mobility assistance……"

32.Therefore, under Section 41, the appropriate government is under

obligation to take suitable measures for creating free accessibility at

bus stops, railway stations, airports, toilets, ticketing counter etc. and

encourage schemes for the promotion of personal mobility of persons

with disabilities.

33.More importantly, Section 44 of the Disability Act, 2016 mandates

compulsory observance of accessibility norms. Under Section 44, no

establishment can be granted permission if there is a failure on the part

of the establishment to adhere to the rules formulated by the Central

Government under Section 40 and such establishment cannot be issued

a certificate of completion of cannot be allowed to occupy the building

if there is a failure to comply with the rules, and Section 45 of the Act

prescribes a time limit for making existing infrastructure and premises

accessible. Section 44 and Section 45 of the Act thus states that:

"……..44. Mandatory observance of accessibility

norms-

(1) No establishment shall be granted permission to

build any structure if the building plan does not

adhere to the rules formulated by the Central

Government under section 40.

(2) No establishment shall be issued a certificate of

completion or allowed to take occupation of a

building unless it has adhered to the rules

formulated by the Central Government……."

"…….45. Time limit for making existing

infrastructure and premises accessible and action

for that purpose. –

(1) All existing public buildings shall be made

accessible in accordance with the rules

formulated by the Central Government within a

period not exceeding five years from the date of

notification of such rules: Provided that the

Central Government may grant extension of time

to the States on a case to case basis for adherence

to this provision depending on their state of

preparedness and other related parameters.

 (2) The appropriate Government and the local

authorities shall formulate and publish an action

plan based on prioritisation, for providing

accessibility in all their buildings and spaces

providing essential services such as all primary

health centres, civil hospitals, schools, railway

stations and bus stops…..."

34.That In case of service providers, whether private or Government, they

are required under Section 46, to provide the services in accordance

with the rules on accessibility formulated by the Central Government

under Section 40. Section 46 prescribes a time limit of two years for

the service providers. Section 46 is produced for the purpose of

convenience.

35.Therefore, considering the existing state of affairs it is evident that the

provisions of the Statute are not being complied with and the ignorance

towards the plight of the diff erently-abled individuals still continues.

36.That Part IV of the Constitution of India contains the Directive

Principles of State Policy which contain the broad directives or

guidelines to be followed by the State while establishing policies and

laws. The legislative and executive powers of the state are to be

exercised under the purview of the Directive Principles of the Indian

Constitution. Out of these Directive Principles of State Policy, Article

 41 carries a significant amount of importance as it imposes a duty on

state to endeavour to maintain right to work, education and public

assistance in certain cases. For the purpose of convenience, Article 41

of the Constitution of India is produced hereunder:

"…….Article 41: Right to work, to education

and to public assistance in certain cases: -

The State shall, within the limits of its

economic capacity and development, make

effective provision for securing the right to

work, to education and to public assistance in

cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and

disablement, and in other cases of undeserved

want." This is an adequate provision which

acts as an obligation on the State also to make

provisions for safeguarding the interest of the

handicapped persons….”

37.That 73rd and 74th Amendment of the Constitution of India make it a

Constitutional obligation for the State to make provisions for

safeguarding the interest of the weaker section of the society, including

'handicapped and mentally retarded'. Article 41 of the Constitution

which is in the nature of a Directive Principle, imposes a duty on the

State to make an effective provision for public assistance to disabled

 persons and it is a well-established principle that the State has an

obligation to apply the Directive Principles of securing a social order in

promotion of the welfare of the people. The importance of Article 41 in

the Constitutional scheme can be measured by this Court's judgment in

Jacob M. Puthuparambil & Ors. V. Kera/a Water Authority & Ors.

(1991) 1 sec 28, wherein it was held that a Court should interpret an

Act so as to advance Article 41.

38.That the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajasthan State Road Transport

Corporation, Jaipur V. Narain Shanker & Anr. laid down the

importance of Article 41 as far as the rights and free accessibility of the

differently-abled is concerned by stating that:

"…….The State has a paramount duty, apart

from liability for tort, to make effective

provision for disablement in cases of

undeserved want- Article 41 of the

Constitution states so……"

39.That it is necessary that an explicit, unequivocal and comprehensive

procedural mechanism are constituted for the benefit and betterment of

disability rights. It is pertinent to fathom that human rights of those

suffering through disability cannot be fought for and secured in a

vacuum. It is apparent that the issue of disability is linked with several

other social, economic and political aspects including those of chronic

 poverty, gender inequality, mal-administration and political

victimization. This must be eradicated to create the 'disability right' an

actual reality. As far as planning and policy making process about lives

and complete recognition and implementation of the human rights of

the differently-abled and other associated rights are concerned, there

must be active inclusion of the disabled people in the same process.

INDIA - SIGNATORY TO UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE

RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (UNCRPD) - OBLIGATED TO

MAKE INDOOR AND OUTDOOR FACILITIES

40.It is pertinent to note that India is amongst the first few nations to

become a signatory of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of

Person with Disabilities (hereinafter referred as "UNCRPD"). Article 9

of the Convention imposes obligation on all states to make all indoor

and outdoor facilities such as roads, modes of transport, hospitals,

workplaces, etc. barrier-free. In addition to this, the convention also

imposes a duty on member states, that all the private organizations

whose facilities are extensively used by the public should remove all

the impediments and barriers for easier accessibility.

41.Moreover, the Article of the Convention also requires the States to

train employees working in public places so as to enable them to meet

the necessities of the disabled. The States are also required to appoint

special guides and assistants for helping the disabled.

42.That the Supreme Court of India has, in Justice Sunanda Bhandare

Foundation Vs. The Union of India (Writ Petition no. 116 of 1998)

given direction to the Central Government, State Government and the

Union Territories to implement the provisions of the persons with

disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full

Participation) Act, 1955 by the end of 2014.

The relevant portion of the judgement is produced

hereunder;

"……Be that as it may, the beneficial

provisions of the 1995 Act cannot be allowed

to remain only on paper for years and thereby

defeating the very purpose of such law one/

legislative policy. The Union, States, Union

Territories and all those upon whom

obligation has been cast under the 1995 Act

have to effectively implement it As a matter of

fact, the role of the governments in the matter

such as this has to be proactive. In the matters

of providing relief to those who are differently

abled, the approach and attitude of the

executive must be liberal and relief oriented

and not obstructive or lethargic A little

 concern for this class who are differently abled

can do wonder in their life and can help to

stand on their own and not remain on the

mercy of others. A welfare state that india is,

must accord its best and special attention to a

section of our society which comprise of

differently abled citizens. This is true equality

and effective confernment of equal

opportunities……”

43.That the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Justice K.S.

Puttaswamy (Retd.) and another versus Union of India and others,
observed that,
“……Denial of benefits arising out of any social
security scheme which promotes socio-economic
rights of citizens is violative of human dignity and
impermissible under our constitutional scheme…...”

44. That in the landmark judgement of the Rajive Raturi vs. Union of India
(UOI) and Ors. The Supreme court of India laid down the detailed
guidelines that are as follows-

MEASURES FOR TRANSPORT FACILITIES:

a. “……Providing an efficient audio announcement

system in all modes of mass public transport, using
Delhi Metro, which has incorporated this feature
with great success, as a model.
 b. Providing for bus stops to have route maps and
schedules in Braille, which is placed at eye-level.
c. Providing for a standardized texture of flooring in
front of bus stops.
d. Providing for easily accessible entry and exit
points at bus stops, railway stations and airports.
e. Providing for an exclusive and designated ticketing
area and assistance/information counter for
visually disabled persons at the point which is
nearest possible to the entry point and at every
platform.
f. Providing for a designated place for disabled
friendly coaches by placing guiding blocks for
disabled-friendly coaches at railway stations, till
the time the entire transport system becomes
disabled friendly entirely.
g. Constructing warning blocks along with edges of
platforms at all railway stations.
h. Modifying the footboard of public transport
vehicles so as to make it more accessible for the
visually disabled with sufficient and uniform width
of steps and between steps…..”
45.That Today, there is an obvious lack of immediate and proper

enforcement of these provisions in India which is a troubling factor for

those who face difficulties in the regular activities. Therefore, even

though the law of the land promises freedom to move freely anywhere

in the country, barriers in the free accessibility directly snatch the

differently-abled from their fundamental right.

46.That there exists an absolute urgency as the new erections are

constantly being formed in the state territory and the constant

expansion of the cities is evident, and so is the disregardful behavior

towards the amenities, facilities and right of free accessibility of the

differently abled. Therefore, the petitioner emphasizes on the fact that

the immediate implementation of the law needs to be placed on high-

priority so that the constructions in that may occur in future may be

able to install the necessary facilities to encourage the differently abled

to move freely in the barrier-free environment.

47.That the State must endeavour, as a part of duty, to contribute to

enforce all the laws and policies made for the persons with disabilities

in proper sense for the upliftment of their lives and status. The State

must ensure that all human beings, irrespective of any differences, are

participating in the mainstream of the society.

48.The State has a moral and legal obligation to ensure equal access to

physical environment, to transportation, to information and

communications, including information and communications

technologies and systems. Moreover, emphasis is supplied on

identification and elimination of barriers and obstacles in buildings,

roads and transportation and other indoor or outdoor facilities.

Moreover, the State is obligated to ensure that appropriate measures

are being taken to develop and monitor the implementation of the

 Convention. Clause 2 of Article of the Convention also imposes duty

on the State to train its stakeholders on accessibility issues.

Ms consistent with this Courts Order within three months

from the date of passing of this judgment.
(ii) We hereby direct the "appropriate Government" to
compute the number of vacancies available in all the
"establishments" and further identify the posts for disabled
persons within a period of three months from today and
implement the same without default.
(iii) The appellant herein shall issue instructions to all the
departments/public sector undertakings/Government
companies declaring that the non observance of the
scheme of reservation for persons with disabilities should
be considered as an act of non- obedience and Nodal
Officer in department/public sector undertakings/
Government companies, responsible for the proper strict
implementation of reservation for person with disabilities,
be departmentally proceeded against for the default….”
49.That in the case of Justice Sunanda Bhandare Foundation v. Union of
India & Another, (2015) 17 SCC 37, the honourable supreme court
held that,
“…Regard being had to the change in core aspects, we
think it apposite to direct all the States and the Union
Territories to file compliance report keeping in view the
provisions of the 2016 Act within twelve weeks hence. The
States and the Union Territories must realize that under
the 2016 Act their responsibilities have grown and they
are required to actualize the purpose of the Act, for there
is an accent on many a sphere with regard to the rights of
 the disabilities. When the law is so concerned for the
disabled persons and makes provision, it is the obligation
of the law executing authorities to give effect to the same
in quite promptitude. The steps taken in this regard shall
be concretely stated in the compliance report within the
time stipulated. When we are directing the States, a duty is
cast also on the States and its authorities to see that the
statutory provisions that are enshrined and applicable to
the cooperative societies, companies, firms, associations
and establishments, institutions, are scrupulously
followed. The State Governments shall take immediate
steps to comply with the requirements of the 2016 Act and
file the compliance report so that this Court can
appreciate the progress made…”
50.That in the case of Rajive Raturi vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.,
(2006) SC 228 CWJ, the honourable supreme court held that,
“…Apart from conferring rights on disabled persons,
there are adequate provisions which cast an obligation on
the State also to make provisions for safeguarding the
interest of the handicapped persons. 73rd and 74th
Amendment of the Constitution of India make it a
Constitutional obligation for the State to make provisions
for safeguarding the interest of the weaker Section of the
society, including 'handicapped and mentally retarded'.
Article 41 of the Constitution which is in the nature of a
Directive Principle, imposes a duty on the State to make
an effective provision, inter alia, for public assistance to
disabled persons and it is a well-established principle that
the State has an obligation to apply the Directive
 Principles of securing a social order in promotion of the
welfare of the people…”
51.That in the case of Vikash Kumar vs. Union Public Service
Commission and Ors, (2021) SC 0067, the honourable supreme court
held that,
“…Part III of our Constitution does not explicitly include
persons with disabilities within its protective fold.
However, much like their able-bodied counterparts, the
golden triangle of Articles 14, 19 and 21 applies with full
force and vigour to the disabled. The RPwD Act 2016
seeks to operationalize and give concrete shape to the
promise of full and equal citizenship held out by the
Constitution to the disabled and to execute its ethos of
inclusion and acceptance….”

52.That in the case of Vikash Kumar vs. Union Public Service

Commission and Ors, (2021) SC 0067, the honourable supreme court
held that,
“...The fundamental postulate upon which the RPwD Act
2016 is based is the principle of equality and non-
discrimination. Section 3 casts an affirmative obligation
on the government to ensure that persons with disabilities
enjoy (i) the right to equality; (ii) a life with dignity; and
(iii) respect for their integrity equally with others. Section
3 is an affirmative declaration of the intent of the
legislature that the fundamental postulate of equality and
non-discrimination is made available to persons with
disabilities without constraining it with the notion of a
benchmark disability. Section 3 is a statutory recognition
of the constitutional rights embodied in Articles 14, 19
 and 21 among other provisions of Part III of the
Constitution. By recognizing a statutory right and
entitlement on the part of persons who are disabled,
Section 3 seeks to implement and facilitate the fulfillment
of the constitutional rights of persons with disabilities…”

53.That in the case of Deepika Sagar Nersekar vs The State Of

Maharashtra, (2016) BOMHC CWP No. 7421, the Hon’ble Bombay
high court held that,
“…From its preamble, it appears that the Disabilities Act
has been enacted to give effect to the Proclamation on the
Full Participation and Equality of the People with
Disabilities in the Asian and Pacific Region. In a meeting
to launch the Asian and Pacific Decade of the Disabled
Persons, 1993-2002 convened by the Economic and Social
Commission for Asian and Pacific Region, which was held
at Beijing from 1-12-1992 to 5-12-1992, a proclamation
was adopted on the Full Participation and Equality of the
People with Disabilities in the Asian and Pacific Region.
Our country is a party to the said Proclamation…”

Right to live includes Right of Accessibility

54.That it is well-settled principle that Right to Life is a fundamental right
which is very broad and expansive, which aims to subsume all the
rights which is necessary for humans to live a dignified life. Life does
not means mere existence rather it means live a dignified life.
Accessibility is one of the rights through which disabled persons can
live a dignified life without feeling helpless and dependant.
55.In the case of Rajive Raturi v. Union of India, (2018) 2 SCC 413, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court held that
“11. Article 21 of the Constitution gives right to
life, mandates that every citizen has right to
live with dignity. It is an umbrella right which
subsumes several other rights that enable life
to be led meaningfully. In Francis Coralie
Mullin v. UT of Delhi [Francis Coralie
Mullin v. UT of Delhi, (1981) 1 SCC 608 : 1981
SCC (Cri) 212] , this Court has held that: (SCC p.
618, para 6)
“6. … The fundamental right to life which is the
most precious human right and which forms
the ark of all other rights must, therefore, be
interpreted in a broad and expansive spirit so
as to invest it with significance and vitality
which may endure for years to come and
enhance the dignity of the individual and the
worth of human person.”
Right to dignity has been particularly
recognised in this judgment as one of the
facets of right to life: Francis Coralie
case [Francis Coralie Mullin v. UT of Delhi,
(1981) 1 SCC 608 : 1981 SCC (Cri) 212] , SCC p.
619, para 8)
“8. … Every act which offends against or
impairs human indignity would constitute
deprivation pro tanto of this right to live….”
This expansive understanding of right to life
assumes greater proportions in respect of
 persons with visual impairments, who need a
higher number of compensative skill enhancing
facilities in order to go about their daily lives
without suffering the indignity of being
generally perceived as being dependant and
helpless…”
56. In the case of  Jeeja Ghosh v. Union of India, (2016) 7 SCC 761, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court held that

“...37. The rights that are guaranteed to

differently-abled persons under the 1995 Act,
are founded on the sound principle of human
dignity which is the core value of human right
and is treated as a significant facet of right to
life and liberty. Such a right, now treated as
human right of the persons who are disabled,
has it roots in Article 21 of the Constitution.
Jurisprudentially, three types of models for
determining the content of the constitutional
value of human dignity are recognised. These
are: (i) Theological Models, (ii) Philosophical
Models, and (iii) Constitutional Models. Legal
scholars were called upon to determine the
theological basis of human dignity as a
constitutional value and as a constitutional
right. Philosophers also came out with their
views justifying human dignity as core human
value. Legal understanding is influenced by
theological and philosophical views, though
these two are not identical. Aquinas and Kant
discussed the jurisprudential aspects of human
dignity based on the aforesaid philosophies.
Over a period of time, human dignity has found
its way through constitutionalism, whether
written or unwritten. Even right to equality is
interpreted based on the value of human
dignity. Insofar as India is concerned, we are
not even required to take shelter under
theological or philosophical theories. We have
a written Constitution which guarantees human
rights that are contained in Part III with the
caption “Fundamental Rights”. One such right
enshrined in Article 21 is right to life and
liberty. Right to life is given a purposeful
meaning by this Court to include right to live
with dignity. It is the purposive interpretation
which has been adopted by this Court to give a
content of the right to human dignity as the
fulfilment of the constitutional value enshrined
in Article 21. Thus, human dignity is a
constitutional value and a constitutional goal.
What are the dimensions of constitutional value
of human dignity? It is beautifully illustrated by
Aharon Barak [ Aharon Barak, Human Dignity
— The Constitutional Value and the
Constitutional Right (Cambridge University
Press, 2015)] (former Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court of Israel) in the following
manner:
 “The constitutional value of human dignity
has a central normative role. Human dignity as
a constitutional value is the factor that unites
the human rights into one whole. It ensures the
normative unity of human rights. This
normative unity is expressed in the three ways:
first, the value of human dignity serves as a
normative basis for constitutional rights set out
in the Constitution; second, it serves as an
interpretative principle for determining the
scope of constitutional rights, including the
right to human dignity; third, the value of
human dignity has an important role in
determining the proportionality of a statute
limiting a constitutional right.”…”

Inaccessibility of Railway is violation of Right to Equality

57.That the aim of Right to Equality before law enshrined under article 14
is not only about eliminating discrimination rather it includes both
eliminating discrimination and promoting equality. Physically
Challenged Persons are facing discrimination because of social barriers
created by the society, which can be eliminate by making the
environment disabled friendly and accessible. By making the railways
accessible the essence of equality could be observed.

Inaccessibility of Railway is violation of Right to move freely

throughout the Country
58.That it is pertinent to mention here that ratio of middle class and have’s
not class is greater than the have’s class in India. Middle Class and
Have’s Not class still prefer to travel throughout the country by the
means of railway, because it is safe and budget friendly and peoples
usually use railway to carry out their business and render the service in
different city on daily. Inaccessibility of Railway is violating the
fundamental to move freely throughout the country of physically
challenged persons, because they cannot access the railway stations
and railway and they cannot afford personal cab or flight.
Obligation of state to minimize Inequality and assist the disabled

59.That under article 38 and 41, it is the obligation of state to minimize

the inequality and to provide assistance in case of disablement, but the
respondents are not fulfilling their duty as neither they are making the
railway station accessible to minimize the inequality nor they are
taking any steps to provide assistance in case of disablement as there
are 0 assistance counter in different railway stations to assist the
physically challenged persons.
60.That in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present PIL may
kindly be allowed.
61. That the Petitioner have no alternative efficacious remedy than to
approach this Hon’ble Court by invoking its jurisdiction under Article
226 of the Constitution of India.
62. That in the above-mentioned facts and circumstances it is most
respectfully prayed by the Petitioners that this Hon’ble Court may be
pleased to :
A. It is, therefore, prayed that your lordships may graciously
be pleased to admit this PIL issue to show cause as to why
the implementation of provisions and measures provided
 under the Rights of Person with Disabilities Act, 2016 has
not been implemented.

And / Or
B. Pass such other order(s) or direction (s) as your lordships
may deem fit and proper in the best interest of challenged
student in Patna Region.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONERS AS IN

DUTYBOUND SHALL EVER BE GREATFUL AND, SHALL EVER PRAY.