GENERAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Issue:
(a) Children with disabilities- Failure of govt. to prepare a comprehensive education scheme in terms of S. 30 of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995

ABOUT THE CASE:
The Social Jurist by present PIL [Social Jurist vs. Union of India and others, C.W. 1342/2003 (Delhi H. C.) Date of filing: 18.02.2003, Status: Pending has highlighted the facts that though Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 has come into force w.e.f. 07.02.1996 but till date the Central Government as well as Government of Delhi have failed to prepare by notification a comprehensive education scheme which shall make provisions for (i) transport facilities to the children with disabilities or in the alternative financial incentives to parents or guardians to enable their children with disabilities to attend schools; (ii) the removal of architectural barriers from schools, colleges or other institutions imparting vocational and professional training; (iii) the supply of books, uniform and other materials to children with disabilities attending school; (iv) the grant of scholarship to students with disabilities; (v) setting up of appropriate fora for the redressal of grievances of parents regarding the placement of their children with disabilities; (vi) suitable modification in the examination system to eliminate purely mathematical questions for the benefit of blind students and student with low vision; (vii) restructuring of curriculum for the benefit of students with disabilities and (viii) restructuring the curriculum for benefit of students with hearing impairment to facilitate them to take only one language as part of their curriculum as required under Section 30 of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (in short, P.W.D. Act, 1995). It has also highlighted the failure on the part of Central Government and Government of Delhi to revise and to bring the centrally sponsored scheme of IEDC (1976-77) in conformity with the provisions of Section 30 of P.W.D. Act, 1995, as the benefits mentioned in the scheme are totally inadequate. It has further highlighted that children with disabilities studying in government and M.C.D. run schools in Delhi are denied the benefits even those provided in centrally sponsored scheme of IEDC (1976-77). It is submitted that the aforesaid failures on the part of the respondents are violative of human and fundamental rights of lacs of children with disabilities as guaranteed to them under Constitution of India read with the provisions of P.W.D. Act, 1995 and Delhi School Education Act, 1973.

It is submitted that according to W.H.O. Report, one out of every 10 persons are suffering from one or the other type of disabilities world wide and the maximum number of such persons are in India. In Delhi, there is a population of about 1.5 crore people and therefore, it is estimated that there is not less than 10 lacs persons with disabilities in Delhi and out of these 10 lacs persons with disabilities, there is not less than 2 lac children with disabilities in the age group 6 to 18 years in Delhi with whom we are primarily concerned in the present PIL.

It is submitted that the education in regard to these children with disabilities is dismal in the entire country. Accordingly to H.R.D. Ministry estimate, less than 1.8% of children with disabilities are in the school. It is submitted that as on 31.03.2002 Government of Delhi run 1011 schools with a strength of 8,75,122 students and MCD run about 1854 primary and 33 nursery schools where in more than 9.34 lacs children are studying. It is also submitted that there are 217 Government aided schools with a strength of 1,55,000 students. It is submitted that average number of children with disabilities in each school is about two, meaning thereby, that around 5,000 children with disabilities are receiving education in these Government and M.C.D. run schools. There may be another around 1000 children with disabilities who may be studying in schools other than Government and M.C.D. run schools. It is unfortunate, that out of about 2 lacs children with disabilities in age group 6-18 years, only about 6,000 such children are in schools in Delhi. It is submitted that one of the main reasons of this unfortunate situation is that the schools run by Government of Delhi and M.C.D. are not disabled friendly and therefore, do not attract children in school. On the other hand, the conditions of these schools are such that students studying in these schools may be push out of the school at any time. That is quite reflected in high percentage of dropouts both in Government and M.C.D. run schools.

It is submitted that the persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 came into force w.e.f. 07.02.1996. The said Act was enacted in the backdrop of the meeting to launch the Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons 1993-2000 convened by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific held at Beijing on 1st to 5th December, 1992 adopted the Proclamation on the Full Participation and Equality of People with Disabilities in the Asian and Pacific Region to which India is a signatory. It is submitted that Section 26 of the P.D. Act, 95 provides that appropriate governments and the local authorities shall ensure that every child with a disability has access to free education in an appropriate environment till he attains the age of 18 years and endeavor to promote the integration of students with disabilities in normal schools.

It is submitted that most of the children studying in Government, Government aided, M.C.D. and M.C.D. aided schools come from the families living in slums, unauthorised colonies and resettlement J.J. Colonies who are economically weak and socially backward. It is estimated that there are more than 15 lakh children between the age group 6-14 in Delhi who either have discontinued studies or have never gone to school, reason being, poor quality of education and lack of basic facilities in Government and M.C.D run schools. More than 75% of these children are girl child. The children with disabilities are the worst sufferer inspite of existence of the P.W.D. Act, 95 because the governments have failed to create conducive atmosphere in their letters and spirit of the said Act for the children with disabilities to receive education in their schools.

It is submitted that the children with disabilities are prevented to receive education because of several problems like lack of transport facilities, architectural barriers in the school, lack of supply of books, uniform and other material, non-availability of scholarship, lack of setting up of appropriate fora for the redressal of grievances of parents regarding the placement of their children, lack of suitable modification in the examination system to eliminate purely mathematical questions for the benefit of the blind students and students with low vision, lack of restructuring of curriculum for benefit of children with disabilities and lack of restructuring the curriculum for benefit of students with hearing impairment to facilitate them to take only one language as part of their curriculum etc. It is submitted that lack of aforesaid and other facilities not only prevent the out of school children with disabilities to come in school but also creates situation for school going children with disabilities to stop attending school. It is, therefore, necessary that adequate provisions be made to make the aforesaid and other such facilities, which the children with disabilities need in order to enable them to attend the school.

It is submitted that in terms of Section 30, both Central Government and Government of Delhi who are appropriate authorities within the meaning of Section 2(a) of the P.W.D. Act, 95 are required to by notification prepare a comprehensive education scheme providing for transport facilities, supply of books etc. for the children with disabilities but till date no such comprehensive education scheme by notification has been prepared. Had it been prepared, notified and implemented, not only the school going children with disabilities would have benefited but large number of out of school children with disabilities would also have been attracted to the school. It is submitted that the respondents are totally unconcerned with the educational needs of the children with disabilities.

It is submitted that there is 26 years old centrally sponsored Integrated Education for Disabled Children Scheme (IEDC Scheme) which was introduced through Educational and Vocational guidance Bureau in year 1976-77 in the selected secondary schools of Delhi Government. It is submitted that the object of the scheme was: (a) To provide educational opportunities for disabled children in common schools to facilitate their retention in the school system; (b) To integrate the disabled children with the general community at all levels as equal partners; and (c) To prepare them for normal growth and to face life with courage and confidence. It is also submitted that the categories under the scheme were: (i) Orthopaedically Handicapped, (ii) Blind and visually impaired, (iii) Hearing impaired, (iv) Mentally retarded (Educable) and (v) Cerebral Palsy. It is further submitted that the benefits extended to the disabled children were as under: -

(i) Books and Stationery allowance of Rs.400/- per child per annum.
(ii) Uniform allowance of Rs.200/- per child per annum.
(iii) Transport allowance of Rs.50/- per month per child for a maximum period of 10 months in one academic session.
(iv) Escort allowance for severally orthopaedically handicapped with lower extremity @ Rs.75/- per month for maximum period of 10 months in one academic session.
(v) Actual cost of equipment subject to a maximum of Rs.2000/- per child for a period of five years.
(vi) Reader allowance of Rs.50/- per month in case of blind children after class Vth.

The petitioner submit that at present out of 1011 schools run by Government of Delhi only 141 schools are covered by the said IEDC Scheme. It is also submitted that the children with disabilities studying in M.C.D. run primary and nursery schools are not even covered by the said IEDC Scheme. It is submitted that even those children studying in these 141 schools are not given the benefits of the said scheme.

A disabled child is eligible for following benefits through schools out of sanctions issued to them under centrally sponsored scheme: -

- Books and Stationery allowance of Rs.400/- per child per annum.
- Uniform allowance of Rs 200/- per child per annum.
- Transport allowance of Rs 50/- per month per child for a maximum period of 10 months in one academic session.
- Escort allowances for severely orthopaedically handicapped with lower extremity @ Rs.75/- per month for maximum period of 10 months in one academic session.
- Actual cost of equipment (Calipers, hearing aid, Wheel Chair, Crutches etc.) subject to a maximum of Rs.2000/- per child for a period of five years.
- Reader's allowance of Rs.50/- per month in case of blind children after class V.

The petitioner submit that it is interesting to note that during the year 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 out of total admissible grant of Rs.16, 24,850 to the Government of Delhi under centrally sponsored scheme of intergraded education for the Disabled children, only Rs.6, 52,325/- was spent and the Rs.9, 52,325/- remained unspent and the sanction of the president was accorded to the carry forward of the said unspent amount of Rs.9, 52,325/- as on 31.03.97 for utilization during 1997-98 on approved items of expenditure vide Ministry of Human Resource Development letter dated 28.03.1998. It is submitted that the Government of Delhi has failed to even fully utilize the grant accorded for the said scheme.

The grievance of petitioner is that firstly, the respondents have not till date by notification prepared a comprehensive educational scheme for the benefit of all disabled children studying in the various schools in Delhi including schools run and aided by Government of Delhi and M.C.D. as required under Section 30 of P.D. Act, 95, Secondly, the centrally sponsored scheme of IEDC (1976-77) is not in conformity with the provisions of Section 30 of P.D. Act, 95 as the said scheme has never been notified as per the provision of Section 30 of P.D.Act,95 and also that the said scheme has not dealt with all kinds of benefits contemplated in Section 30 of P.D. Act and further that the said scheme is not in accordance with the letters and spirit of Section 30 of P.D.Act,95. Thirdly, the said IEDC Scheme (1976-77) is obsolete and unworkable as the rate at which benefits have been prescribed are totally inadequate and are totally incomprehensive, as for example, Rs.50/- per month per child as transport allowance and Rs.200/- per child per annum as uniform allowance is totally inadequate and defeats the object underlying in the scheme. Fourthly, the said scheme is arbitrary and discriminatory as it covers children with disabilities only in 141 schools run by Government of Delhi and does not cover thousands of other children with disabilities studying in other 870 Schools run by Government of Delhi, 1887 schools run by M.C.D., Government and M.C.D. aided schools and also other schools of Delhi, Fifthly, the grant given by Human Resource Development Ministry to Government of Delhi remained unutilized and unspent. Sixthly, the benefits whatsoever provided in the said scheme are denied to the children with disabilities studying in Government run schools who are in dire need of the same.

The petitioner are highlighting two specific cases of children with disabilities studying in schools run by Government of Delhi, as illustrations, to whom the benefits provided in the IEDC Scheme were denied. First case is of a 11 years old girl child Neha D/o Shri. Lal Babu Sharma R/o RZ 26/P/E 25A Indira Park Extension, Palam Colony New Delhi-45 studying in class V-B in Ram Dhari Singh Dhinkar Sarvodaya Kanya Vidalaya No.1, Sagarpur, New Delhi-110045. Neha at the age of 4 years lost her both legs in a road accident on 22.05.1995 and suffered disability to the tune of 60%. She has till date already undergone 12 major operations. Her father who was in a petty job in a private establishment at the time of accident of Neha, had to leave the job as full time attention was required for Neha's care. Circumstances, led him to lead a life of destitute. However, he did not interrupt the studies of Neha who is presently studying in class-V. Neha needs conveyance facilities to attend school, facility of attendant at school, scholarship to sustain her studies, medical attention etc; but the respondents make none of these facilities available to her. It may also be stated here that facilities of special toilet and ramps for children with disabilities are also not available in the school in which Neha is studying. It may be stated that except free books which are given to all children, no other facility is provided to Neha. It is submitted that apart from personal request, a written request dated 04.05.2002 was made by Palam Abibhavak Sangh on behalf of Neha and other children with disabilities to the Principal of the school requesting him to provide benefits to which Neha and other children with disabilities are entitled to. The principal did not take any action on the said request and thereupon a letter dated 04.05.2002 was given to the Director of Education, Government of Delhi therein making a request that benefits be given to Neha and all other similarly placed children in all the schools in Delhi. It is submitted that till date no response has been received from the Director of Education nor the benefits have been allowed to Neha. Neha, an innocent child with severe disability is waiting for a day when Government of Delhi will rise to the occasion and ensure that all the children like her would be paid due attention so to enable them to receive education as has been promised not only by the Constitution of India but by also by the P.D. Act, 1995.

The second case is of a 16 years old boy Durgesh Kumar S/o Shri. Sharda Prashad Misra R/o RZ26P/86 Indira Park, Ext, Palam Colony , New Delhi who is studying in class XI in Government Senior Secondary Bal Vidalaya No.2, Sagarpur New Delhi-45. Durgesh Kumar is suffering from orthopedic disability of more than 40%. He is not given any benefit as provided in the said IEDC Scheme. It is submitted that apart from personal request a letter was written to the principal of the school by Palam Abibahavak Sangh thereby drawing the attention of the principal that Durgesh Kumar is an economically weak student and is entitled to the benefits announced by the Government for the benefit of children with disabilities but the principal expressed his inability to do anything in the matter. Thereafter, a letter-dated 10.06.2002 was written to the Director of Education Government of Delhi for ensuring availability of benefits admissible to the children with disabilities to Durgesh and other students but no action was taken. The said letter was followed by a written request dated 11.06.2002 by the children Durgesh Kumar and his father Sharda Parsad to the Principal of the school but nothing happened.

It is submitted that unless the governments by notification prepare comprehensive education scheme as contemplated in Section 30 of P.D. Act 95 and implement the same in its true letters and spirit, it would not be possible to attract out of school two lacs children with disabilities in the school and also to retain in school for long the children with disabilities presently studying in various schools in Delhi particularly in the schools run and aided by Government of Delhi and M.C.D.

The petitioner sought directions directing the respondents and more particularly Central Government and Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi to forthwith by notification prepare a comprehensive education scheme for children with disabilities for providing benefits of transportation, books etc as required under Section 30 or Persons with Disabilities (Equal opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full participation) Act, 1995;and till preparation of comprehensive education scheme by notification as required under Section 30 of Persons with Disabilities (Equal opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, the benefits as provided in the centrally sponsored scheme of IEDC (1976-77) should not be confined to only 141 schools run by Government of Delhi but should be extended to all the schools of Delhi including schools run and aided by Government of Delhi and M.C.D and to revise the benefits provided in the said I.E.D.C. Scheme are to make them adequate and also to ensure that these benefits are not denied to the students with disabilities studying in the schools. The High Court has directed the governments to file their response to the PIL. The matter is pending for decision.

COMMENTS:
Media has widely highlighted the issue.
['Govt gets HC notice on education for disabled kids' Tribune 20.02.2003, 'Disabled rights' Hindustan Times 20.02.2003, 'HC notice on lack of facilities for disabled kids' Indian Express 20.02.2003, 'Notices issued on education for disabled' Hindu 20.02.2003, 'HC notices on schemes for disabled' Statesman 20.02.2003, 'Better facilities for disabled: HC' Times of India 19.07.2003, 'Educating disabled: HC seeks plan' Indian Express 25.09.2003, 'Delhi govt won't lossen purse strings for disabled: Centre' Indian Express 02.10.2003, 'Educational policy for disabled kids soon' Pioneer 04.10.2003, 'Education scheme for disabled by November' Tribune 04.10.2003, 'Parents of disabled kids to have say in PTAs' Indian Express 09.10.2003. Some of the web sites on net have shown complete text of the PIL.