Reasonable Accommodation

“Disability is not merely a medical or welfare issue; much less a charity issue; rather, it is a development and human rights issue.” -NHRC

3.1 Introduction:

Discrimination is a negative prejudice which leads to social exclusion. Thus, for the establishment of equality and the recognition of potential and equal opportunity to all there is need to go beyond legal and pragmatic equality and challenge the underlying social and cultural roots of discrimination for overall societal development. Judicial interventions and issue specific legislatures have been effective in bringing about a change in attitudes of people. One of such intervention could be seen in Dr. Jagdish Saran & Ors. vs Union of India, where Krishna Iyer

Realizing the social and cultural impact of this, India ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) in 2007.

Subsequently, in the year 2009 a writ petition was brought before the hon’ble Bombay High Court on the grounds that the petitioner had been denied being considered for employment despite providing medical reports proving his fitness, in the case of Ranjit Kumar Rajak vs State Bank of India. Here, the Court relied on the CRPD while discussing the definitions of “reasonable accommodation” and “undue burden” and stated that, even though they are not a part of Indian Municipal Laws, as India has signed and ratified the UNCRPD, the Article 27 of the Convention which recognizes the right of persons with disability to be accepted in the labour market, can be read along with Right to Life prescribed in the Indian Constitution, and hence make it a duty of the state to provide adjustment in a system to accommodate on a proven need, subject to any undue burden or

In Suchita Srivastava vs Chandigarh Administration the Supreme Court had to deal with the issue of the legal capacity of a woman with mental retardation to decide on her pregnancy. As the pregnancy was a result of rape and there is a distinction between “mentally ill” and “mental retardation”, the Court held that the consent of the woman in termination of pregnancy is mandatory. In this manner, the judiciary upheld the citizen’s human dignity and ruled in the favour of right to life. Similarly, in a fight for equal opportunity, representation and promotion of persons with disabilities to higher level positions in the case of Rajeev Kumar Gupta vs Union of India, Supreme Court held that there should be 3% reservation in direct recruitment as well as in promotion in posts suitable for persons with disability. Hence, providing sustainable and dignified jobs and hence securing a sense of equality amongst the