W.P.(C) 7318/2025 | Delhi High Court (Division Bench) | C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla, JJ. | Decided on 18 November 2025 Introduction In Shambhu Nath Rai v. Union of India, the Delhi High Court held that where a government servant is the caregiver of a disabled dependent, the dependent’s interests ordinarily deserve primacy, […]
In September 2025, the Central Administrative Tribunal handed down what many in the disability rights community called a watershed moment. The CAT’s judgment in Molshree Aggarwal v. UPSC declared that the systematic exclusion of persons with Specific Learning Disabilities from reserved posts in the Civil Services Examination violated the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act,
Introduction The evolving jurisprudence on disability rights in India continues to expose the tension between formal administrative processes and substantive equality. The recent decision of the Supreme Court in Sudhanshu Kardam v. Comptroller and Auditor General of India (2026)[1] presents a compelling instance of this tension. The case traverses through the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT),
Mission Accessibility, in collaboration with a team of researchers and accessibility rights activists, conducted a multi-year, three-country research-in-action project titled “Accessibility, Language, and Tech for the People (ALT).” The project, supported by Whose Knowledge? a global campaign working to centre the knowledge of marginalised communities online broadly aimed to understand the collective experiences and challenges
Access to Hindi Digital Content: An Urgent Accessibility Imperative Read More »
In September 2025, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) quietly delivered what may become one of the most important judgments for persons with Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) in India’s civil services. The case of Molshree Aggarwal & Sonalika Aggarwal v. UPSC & Ors., is more than just another legal battle over reservation. It’s a story of
Introduction The Delhi High Court, through its order dated 1st September 2025, directed the Central Government to speed up the process of issuing guidelines to the Over-The-Top (hereinafter referred to as the “OTT”) to incorporate accessibility features on their respective platforms for persons with disabilities. The order was passed when Justice Sachin Datta was hearing
Delhi HC Pushes for Inclusive OTT Platforms: Accessibility as a Legal Imperative Read More »
The recent revelation that Lady Hardinge Medical College (LHMC) wrongly disqualified disabled NEET-qualified candidates from the MBBS reservation quota signals a troubling failure within India’s medical certification system. The intervention by AIIMS experts followed by a Delhi High Court order and subsequent exposure of the flaws in LHMC’s certification process throws light on grave issues
Sometimes, the conflict in disability rights is not between persons with and without disabilities, but within different groups of persons with disabilities themselves. The Kerala High Court’s judgment dated 27.08.2025 in N. Biju v. State of Kerala present case illustrates this tension vividly. Facts By Government Orders, persons with disabilities were permitted to operate coffee
This week, we had a total of 4 hearings. On Monday, we had 3 cases listed. The first was in the Delhi High Court, on the issue of incorporation of accessibility features in all OTT content. We were able to achieve a number of small victories in this hearing. For one thing, the Union Ministry
Weekly Newsletter for the week of 1st of September Read More »
Disability rights On Monday 17th February, we attended a mediation session on behalf of Shri Deepak Rai against Iit Bombay concerning his case that they denied him certain reasonable accommodations that he needed as a visually disabled student pursuing a course in biotechnology at the masters level. After some discussion, Iit Bombay agreed to all
Weekly Newsletter for the week of 17th of Feb Read More »
