National Federation of the Blind v. Union of India & Anr.

1. This writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers: “a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order or direction thereby directing the respondent no.1 to issue direction to all State Govts. and Union Territories Under section 38 of National Food Security Act, 2013 for including visually impaired and other persons with disabilities in the category of eligible persons under Antyodaya Anna Yojana and priority households for the purpose of implementation of the food security scheme guaranteed under Sub Section 1 of Section 10 of the National Food Security Act 2013 and also to ensure that at least 5% beneficiaries of food security scheme under the Act are from categories of persons with disabilities as defined in The Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act 2016 (in short RPD Act 2016) in terms of section 37(b) of RPD Act 2016. b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing the respondent No.1 to consider the cases of persons with disabilities and visually impaired persons even without ration cards on the basis of their disability certificates and / or UDID for getting benefit under National Food Security Act, 2013. c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direct all State Govt. and UTs under Section 38 of National Food Security Act to provide food grains free of cost to poor persons with disabilities as was done for migrant labourers and others during the present pandemic. d) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, give free ration to all persons with disabilities without ration cards on the basis of their disability certificates and / or UDID under Pradhan Mantri Garib Anna Kalyan Yojana. e) Grant any other or further relief which Your Lordship deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. The concern raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is with regard to the entitlement of persons with disabilities to the benefits under various programmes formulated by the Government of India under the National Food Security Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 2013”). According to the petitioner, persons with disabilities are required to be covered under the Antyodaya Anna Yojana (“AAY”), as well as the priority households (“PHH”) under the Act, 2013.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for both the sides at length and on earlier dates of hearing, Mr. S. K. Rungta, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has taken this Court to the various provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 2016”), especially Section 37(b) thereof, which provides for a reservation in all poverty alleviation and developmental schemes for persons with disabilities.

4. In our order dated 22 nd July, 2020, we took note of the statutory provisions and the stand taken by the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disablities, Government of India, as reflected in the counter affidavit filed by the Union of India. During the course of proceedings, all States and Union Territories were also impleaded as parties to the writ petition, as they are the implementing agencies under the Act, 2013.

5. At the hearing on 24 th August, 2020, we were informed that the Government of India has issued a communication dated 22 nd August, 2020 to all States and Union Territories regarding the coverage of persons with disabilities under the Act, 2013. A copy of the said communication issued by the Department of Food and Public Distribution (“DFPD”), Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Disctribution has also thereafter been placed on record. It was inter alia reiterated therein that disability is one of the criteria for inclusion of beneficiaries under the AAY and as per the identification criteria as PHH.

6. Pursuant to the aforesaid communication, certain further concerns were raised by Mr. Rungta at the hearing on 07 th September, 2020. Mr. Chetan Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General and Mr. Sudhanshu Pandey, Secretary, DFPD (who also attended the hearing on that date) assured the Court that these concerns would also be looked into, and appropriate directions would be issued.

7. Now, the Central Government has issued further directions to all the states on 07 th September, 2020, which have also been placed on record. Paragraph 2 of the said communication sets out the following directions to the States and Union Territories: “i. Disability as separate criteria within the eligibility criteria may be identified by all States/UTs for inclusion of persons with disability, subject to exclusion criteria, for coverage under National Food Security Act, 2013. ii. It may be ensured that all the disabled persons, who are eligible as per identification criteria of beneficiaries under NFSA, are covercd under the National Food Security Act, 2013. Those who are not already covered should be covered with fresh ration cards to be issued as per the existing/revised eligibility criteria that include disability as separate criteria. iii. If a disabled candidate is at par with another general candidate, preference should be given to disabled person. iv. It may be ensured that a data base of disabled persons covered under both categories viz. AAY & PHH under NFSA shall be created/maintained separately even for PwDs being covered as a part of a family. A suitable mechanism of monitoring and reporting may accordingly be put in place for compliance. v. No disabled person otherwise eligible shall be denied on the ground that the State has exhausted its upper limit under NFSA. In case such a situation arises, inclusion of disabled person shall take precedence. He may be given precedence over those persons who may be either at par or above in terms of consumption expenditure criteria. vi. All the States/UTs shall ensure and direct the concerned District Administration to put in place an appropriate mechanism and whole machinery may be mobilized in a mission mode for compliance of directions made above.”

8. Mr. Rungta submits that these directions issued by the Central Government serve the purpose of the present petition, and seeks appropriate directions to the States and Union Territories for effective implementation thereof.

9. We find that the directions have been issued under Section 38 of the Act, 2013, which requires the State Governments to comply with directions issued by the Union Government thereunder. These directions are thus bound to be followed by all the States and Union Territories and correspondingly, the States shall revise their criteria and persons with disabilities shall be added as a separate class and they shall be considered for the benefits to be extended to the persons with disabilities of the Antyodaya Anna Yojna scheme as well as priority households.

10. We expect from the States and the Union Territories that the directions issued by the Central Government, as mentioned hereinabove, shall be scrupulously followed by them and they will revise the criteria as early as possible and practicable for enabling the benefits under the aforesaid schemes to be availed by persons with disabilities.

11. We place on record our appreciation of the constructive assistance rendered by Mr. S.K. Rungta, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Chetan Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General and learned counsel for the States and Union Territories.

12. With these observations, the petition alongwith pending application is hereby disposed of. The petitioner shall however be at liberty to file a further petition before the appropriate Court if the need arises.

CHIEF JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN, J SEPTEMBER 29, 2020 ns