Specially Abled Persons Be Referred To In Respectful Language Keeping In View Prescribed Disability Etiquette: JKL High Court

The directions were passed by the bench comprising Chief Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice Rahul Bharti while hearing a plea in terms of which the petitioner had invoked the jurisdiction of the Court for seeking directions upon the Respondents concerning the specially abled citizens at large.

In his plea before the court the petitioner contended that across the world respectful language, disability communication, disability etiquette have been prescribed, mentioned and used during communications, pleadings, Judicial orders, academic writings, official work, educational textbooks, pamphlets, across Public and Private offices, however the same is not seriously been put into practice here.

The petitioner also brought to the notice of the court that across each district Courts of Jammu and Kashmir, disability friendly infrastructure is yet to be implemented and developed and persons with disability or specially abled persons are going through extreme hardships in approaching District Courts. As legal matters of persons with disability or special abilities are mostly adjudicated by District Courts such as PDJ Courts of each District and almost all Principal District Courts are functioning from First Floor or Second Floor, thus making it quiet impossible for persons with disability to approach Court of Law, the petitioner averred.

The petitioner further submitted that he has approached all the respondents for ensuring adherence to the inclusion strategy launched at international level for having reference to language guidelines so introduced in the terminology used in the office/Courts etc, but not much has been done on the issues raised.

The petitioner in his PIL also referred to the recent speech of CJI DY Chandrachud wherein he had proposed his thoughts on fight against ableism remarked, "Disabled people want rights, not pity... Public places continue to be inaccessible to disabled persons despite laws."

Keeping this in view the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus in terms of which the respondents along with general public be restrained from mentioning or referring persons with disabilities or specially abled persons as mentally retarded, sick, unfortunate, handicapped person, abnormal, mental, poor, unfortunate person, crippled, deformed , mad person, dwarf, wheelchair bound, dwarf, albino, disabled, mongoloid, midget, deaf and dumb, troubled person in official internal and external communications, judicial orders, notifications, circulars, newspapers, textbooks, Court orders.

The petitioner further prayed appropriate writ for declaring words such as mentally retarded used in Section 2(g) of The National trust for welfare of persons with autism, cerebral palsy, mental retardation and multiple disabilities act 1999 as violative of Article 14, 15 and article 21 of Indian Constitution.

Dealing with the contentions of the petitioner the bench observed,

"we are of the view that the issue raised needs to be addressed by the respondents, so as to value the universal conventions and the sentiments of these specially abled persons for giving them full support humanly and socially".

Dealing with the submissions of the petitioner for asking the respondents to ensure that in the event any of specially abled person becomes victim of some commission of offence(s), it shall be ensured that the Police records their statements by approaching at their place of convenience/residence so as to avoid bringing them to the Police Station, the bench observed,

"We hope and trust that the respondents will take effective and meaningful steps for ensuring the recording of the statements of any specially abled persons, in the eventuality we have detailed out above, at their place of convenience/residence. We expect that the respondents shall ensure full respect and honour to all citizens in terms of their personality without letting them suffer any impression that the society and State sees and address the physically and mentally challenged persons as liabilities carrying personalities"

Consequently the bench granted two weeks time to the respondents to file their responses and listed the matter for condonation again on 17:12:2022.

Case Title : Badrul Duja Vs Union of India & Ors.

Coram : Chief Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice Rahul Bharti.

Counsel For Petitioner : Petitioner in Person.

Counsel For Respondent : Mr Tahir Majid Shamsi DSGI, Mr Ilyas Laway GA, Mr Shah Amir.

Click Here To Read/Download Order