The Delhi High Court Questions DU to furnish a comprehensive affidavit detailing the physical infrastructure and accessibility provisions for individuals with disabilities at the Campus Law Centre (CLC). This directive follows a petition by Jayant Singh Raghav who is a disabled student at the university. He expressed concerns about the availability of assistance devices for disabled students during examinations.
In response to the plea, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav specified that the affidavit should encompass details on the implementation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. Additionally, the affidavit has expected to incorporate suggestions from amicus curiae Advocate Kamal Gupta.
Granting a final opportunity, the court has allowed a seven-day window for the university to submit the comprehensive affidavit. This development underscores the court’s keen interest in ensuring compliance with disability rights legislation and addressing the specific challenges faced by disabled students, particularly in the examination process.
Respondent no. 1, the University, has been given a final chance by the court after the High Court questions DU. It needs to present a thorough affidavit outlining the application of the Act of 2016’s provisions and the suggestions mentioned in the Amicus Curiae report. The University has given seven days to do so. An earlier study from the Amicus Curiae recommended improvements to CLC’s physical infrastructure and accessibility.
The University Grants Commission’s 2022 Accessibility Guidelines and Standards for Higher Education Institutions and Universities had outlined in the report. The High Court directed the University to implement them immediately. The study recommended installing at least ten tactile ramps at different sites and especially demanded an access assessment of CLC.
The audit also brought attention to a major problem. This is that the present CLC building does not have a lift, despite UGC norms requiring it. The High Court questions DU and asks the University to respond to these issues within the allotted term. The court stressed, and give a thorough explanation of the actions it took to comply with the Act of 2016 as well as the Amicus Curiae’s suggestions.
After the High Court questions DU, the university has conveyed that classes designated for individuals with disabilities will exclusively held on the ground floor due to the absence of a lift. The deficiency of a lift has taken as the reason for this restriction. In addition, the report emphasises the necessity for a fully operational disabled-accessible washroom on each floor. Currently, there is only one such facility provided in the entire CLC campus.
In response to the concerns raised, the university’s legal representative assured the required repair work and the implementation of facilities. It will have followed as per the suggestions in the amicus curiae’s report. The recommendations are successfully undertaken.
Nonetheless, the court has pointed out that the Disability Act and the amicus curiae’s recommendations also describe new requirements. It has anticipated that the institution would fulfil these responsibilities in order to provide complete accessibility for people with impairments. On December 7, the case will be reexamined to provide more time to see how well the university adhere to the criteria.
