-----Original Message----- From: Asudani, Rajesh Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 10:51 AM To: 'Bhushan Punani'; Rajesh H. Asudani; Bhushan Punani; anand...@gmail.com; Jayshree raveendran; sdr...@gmail.com; L Govinda Rao; srikala.bhar...@gmail.com; Merry Barua; G. Syamala; rajive raturi; Uma Tuli; malabik...@yahoo.com; mita...@gmail.com; S.Y Kothari; s.khun...@nic.in; K.G Verma; chandan.mukher...@gmail.com; pi...@nic.in; Poonam Natrajan; rehab...@ndc.vsnl.net.in; Director IPH; k Ramakrishna; Rajiv Rajan; Bhargavi Davar; bvda...@gmail.com; torchbearer...@gmail.com; ak...@senseintindia.org; jpgadk...@gmail.com; Menon; as_naraya...@hotmail.com; Major HPS Ahluwalia; r.desir...@nic.in Dr Arbind Prasad; Sudha Kaul Subject: RE: Comments on disability law drafting subcommittee reports
Madam/Sir Blind graduates Forum of India,AN NGO wishes to submit following memorandum to the committee drafting the new disability law. Hope it will be paid the desired attention. Blind Graduates Forum of India Memorandum to the Committee drafting new disability legislation Title We feel that the title of the act should be simple, meaningful and quotable easily. So, it is in fitness of things that the new act be called: "Rights of persons with disabilities act". Definitions Reasonable accommodation While defining reasonable accommodation, the phrase "where in a particular case" should be omitted. We opine that provision of enabling environment which reasonable accommodation envisages should be made in the context of possibility and probability that persons with disabilities would be able to participate maximally in a given activity. So, even if said reasonable accommodation may be construed to impose a disproportionate burden in a particular case, it may be desirable to introduce it in the general context of persons with disabilities clarified above. The phrase "on equal basis with others" used at various places is enigmatic. What is precisely meant by others is left to conjecture. And persons with disabilities are not only to be placed at par with non disabled as far as rights and dignity is concerned, but they are to be regarded human beings with certain impairments who have their own specific rights and needs also which may not be reflected by prescription of "on equal basis with others". While defining reasonable accommodation, the phrase "netted in a particular case" is used. How this netting is to be done is a very vague and contentious issue. Instead of netting in a particular case, the proposition should be: "ensure effective participation of persons with disabilities in a particular institution/establishment". In a particular case, it may be construed to place a disproportionate burden if expensive assistive technology is demanded by a blind employee. But if it is perceived as ensuring equality of opportunity to blind as a whole in an institution if assistive technology is installed there, it may not be so construed. It may happen that in a particular establishment, only a handful of persons with disabilities may actually work or study, and so, reasonable accommodation may be denied to them, as netting in their particular case may go against it, but not so, if it is thought to afford equality widely to disabled at large irrespective of actual number present at the time. The act does not lay down 40% as the minimum extent of disability. So, does it mean existence of conditions defined as disabilities is sufficient for all purposes and there is no need of quantifying them into percentages? If it is so, mention of severe disabilities as person with more than 80% disability clearly indicates at quantification in percentage form. How this percentage is to be arrived at medically is vague and subjective proposition. Severe and moderate and mild disabilities may be laid down clearly in terms of quantities like visual acuity between x: x and y:y is severe and that between z:z and a:a is moderate and so on. Benefits/entitlements also should be apportioned based on the mildness, moderateness or severety of disability, as it is clear that more often than not, severely disabled are left out of their rightful entitlements both on paper and in practice. Operational aspects can also be included in determining the extent of disability. Definition of inclusive environment is confined to education and does not lay down anything. Disability Twin definition generic and enumerative is welcome. However, some operational aspect also needs to be brought in it. It may be stipulated that: "when impairments reversible/irreversible in combination with prevalent infrastructure and/or attitudes, in any situation, lead to making a person more vulnerable than an average person without such impairment similarly situated, or invariably require human or mechanical assistance for a person to accomplish certain task effectively and without undue risk, such impairments may reasonably be regarded disabling." This does make the definition context dependent. however, enumeration of general categories also lays down that certain impairments do have such an impact in general. This operational aspect would leave the scope open for certain impairments to be defined as disabilities in particular contexts and take appropriate action of entitlement or non discrimination for them. Besides, Exclusion of persons with sexual disorders on grounds of no demand from them and no explicit entitlements for them in act is utterly unwelcome. Some entitlements like 1% reservations in jobs would go a long way in uplifting their standard of living, and no demand on their part may be a result of their being utterly outside the fold of activities and know of things. A petition was also filed before supreme court last year but it rejected plea of any entitlements to them and asked to approach parliament instead. It is high time that they are put at par with persons with disabilities. Adoption of purely medical certification for the time being on ground that no suitable tools exist for socio-medical certification is flawed. An interdisciplinary board for certification consisting of medical practitioners, social workers and persons with disabilities themselves may use index of daily activities and other valid tools to assess actual disability resulting from a given impairment and barriers. Further, medical monopoly even for certifying a person fit for a given educational course or job should be negated immediately through suitable legal provisions. Stipulation that a certificate once issued should be recognized by all authorities all over India without any additional formalities should be couched in a mandatory language and full faith and credit clause envisaged in the constitution should be applied to such certificates. Awareness Raising While providing for various awareness raising measures, it must be born in mind that UNCRPD includes awareness about persons with disabilities in the human rights framework. So, it may be stipulated in order to concretize this right that no negative, exclusionary or harmful presumption be drawn on the basis of disability to deny persons with disabilities amenities/facilities/services available to public at large. Besides, awareness of medical fraternity should be included specifically as almost always, doctors are the first point of contact between disabled and system, even they are the bearers of information that a person is finally disabled. So, they be properly informed and be duty bound to guide disabled person to proper resources. Uniform nomenclature recognized by disability legislation be followed while mentioning/referring to various categories of disabled persons in state proceedings/transactions/laws etc. The explicit provision is necessary, as various bodies refer to various categories of disabled persons arbitrarily and fancifully in the names they deem fit. This causes needless confusion and often results in undue denials and discriminations. For instance, many a times advertisements or provisions mention that they are meant for physically disabled or handicapped persons. This leaves unanswered what categories are included in them. Often they are aimed only at orthopedically disabled persons but often Visual and auditory disabilities are also aimed to be included. So, uniformity in reference in accordance with the disability statute should be prescribed in the statute. Accessibility Normative penalties for non-compliance with accessibility norms are welcome. However, clear cut legal provisions entailing such penalties are the need of the hour since trusting discretion of enforcement authorities in such matters is too much in Indian context. If enforcement authority succeeds in enforcing clearly laid down norms and time frame for accessibility norms, much would be achieved. Act should clearly provide for, say, five years, within which required accessibility would be fully achieved. Monetary penalty must be retained for cases of willful default. Further, monetary penalty should be clearly linked with the cost of providing accessibility measures and a further punitive aspect. Fine so recovered may be employed preferentially for making good the accessibility default. Human Resource Development Right to Life what has been provided is surely commendable. Apart from it, right to life must include right to "An unimpaired body and mind." So, the act should strongly provide for cost of all measures to do away with impairments like keratoplasty, cochlear implants, prosthetic limbs, etc. to be born by government. Donation of body parts like cornea and others in case of death at least in government hospitals be provided for to reduce avoidable lack of organs. Religious and other objections to such provisions may be suitably tackled by having recourse to reasonable restriction on fundamental rights to religious freedom and it is not essential hallmark of any religion not to donate parts of a dead body. If human welfare is the fundamental tenet of all religions, then taking parts of a dead body for enhancing life of living ones cannot be faulted on any ground. All technological assistive devices including mobility aids, reading devices, softwares vision or other sensory enhancement devices be blanketly exempted from import duty and other levies. Government should bear the full cost of such devices or highly subsidize them as alleviation of disability by improving the impaired sense, or limb falls under right to life. Freedom of speech and expression Suitable accessibility measures be again emphasized in making this freedom meaningful to sensorily impaired. Human assistance in addition to mechanical aid be also emphasized. Priority of making materials accessible for disabled over Intelectual property rights hindering it, be clearly provided for. Access to Justice Legal services authority be clearly mandated to provide free legal aid to clients with disabilities. This free legal aid must be provided at least in disability related litigation. All judicial proceedings including documents be made accessible to persons with sensory disabilities by converting them into accessible formats, or by providing readers and interpreters at the cost of government. Authorities The proposed Disability rights authority or disability commission be vested with Awareness, sensitization, evolution of policy and law, monitoring implementation of law and coordination of various activities under the act at the national level proactively, Chief commissioner being at the helm, with state units/commission functioning under state commissioners and with even district committees. However, adjudication of disability rights disputes should not be entrusted to this authority or state commissioners or chief commissioners. Implementation and adjudication should be kept separate. Disability disputes resolution forums on the lines of consumers forums be constituted, comprising of a judicial members coupled with persons from other fields, general public and persons with disabilities, at national state and district level. This will ensure effective and prompt and binding adjudication of disability disputes. Such disability fora be invested with full powers of civil court including initiating contempt proceedings for non-compliance of its orders. If suit is brought in HC for non compliance of disability forum order, the HC should be bound to issue interim enforcement decree before deciding the petition on merits. Very non-enforcement of disability forum order should give rise to negative presumption against the defaulter and the onus to prove that the order is erroneous should be on the defaulting institution and not upon the disabled litigant. Aggrieved person with disability should not have to again prove her/his right in HC. Further, state commissioners and chief commissioner should be preferentially persons with disabilities themselves, or should have demonstrated experience in disability field at any rate, and such appointments should be by way of independent charge always. Disability rights commissions may also be assigned the task of ensuring enforcement of orders of disability disputes redressal fora. Proposed education authority should not be a transitory body merely, but should have existence at least in every state on the continuous basis with a mandate to advice and assist educational institutions about best methods of making all students with disabilities benefit from education and be active participants in the process. Legal capacity Now, if we say that all persons have capacity to act and take decisions, it would not be true of moderately and profoundly mentally retarded persons and persons having extreme mood and thought disorders. The proposition is true regarding sensory and physically impaired persons and those with specific learning disabilities only. However, the whole discussion of legal capacity seems to be based on the premise that legal capacity has to be posited only of mentally challenged. This view is erroneous and legal capacity has to be predicated of persons with disabilities as a whole. Legal capacity implies that a person is regarded as a person in law with all rights and obligations. So, sensorily and physically impaired persons have to be given their due legal status with necessary support and modifications wherever called for. For ex. writing an exam with scribe is an instance of legal capacity being exercised with adequate support. If scribe is denied, person is thwarted from performing an action, and so legal capacity is infringed. This is not supportive decision making, but supportive exercise of legal capacity. Instead of laying supportive decision making, supportive access to data, information and places has to be laid down. Decision, if it is to be predicated of a person, must be made by the person herself/himself after data, information and places are made accessible in every situation. Otherwise, if a person is not able to appreciate the facts and reality even after such steps, then no further support is warranted for making decisions, or else, they would be the decisions of support giving individual and not of the person herself. Such support may include simplifying the contents and transforming it into various accessible formats etc for sensorily disabled. Saying that transition from guardianship to supportive exercise of legal capacity can be universally adopted for all disabilities including mentally challenged, is not justified. However, decisions taken by those with varying psychological conditions, after due support, may be given priority, and may not be unnecessarily interfered with, if they do not involve any harm to themselves, society in general, and do not pose great financial burden on exchequer. Disability commission only to oversee legal capacity with supportive decision making is a restrictive proposition. Even though, it is proposed as constitutional body, no amendments in the constitution are suggested. Further, persons with mental illness are proposed to be included in it. It would be worthwhile to understand that mental illness is not, despite suggestions to that effect, simply cognitive emotional and spiritual variation, but there are some markers of psychopathology like loss of interest in all activities, inability to utilize one's potential, destructive behaviour, extreme mood shifts etc. Normal variation is as a rule well tolerated in society. So, what is gained by positing legal measures for mentally ill, instead of effective treatment, is beyond the understanding of this author and he will not further comment on the issue in his comments. Any specific learning impairments like dyscalculia, dysgraphia etc. can be regarded educational disabilities and may be given equalizing measures, but beyond that, no reason is seen in adopting legal measures for other mental illnesses except laying down that their basic needs be catered to by society and state and they be given benefit of all available psychological and psychiatric treatment. Legal capacity is sine qua non for all other rights, is the right observation. Liberty and security of person exploitation violence and abuse: Articles 23 and 24 of the constitution be suitably amended to prevent exploitation violence and abuse on account of disability or resulting in disability. The provision is required, as these things are the norm for persons with disabilities rather than exception in their daily life. Disability is often the causing factor, or often the direct result of such practices. So, the concerned articles of the constitution must include the disability perspective. freedom from degrading treatment: Statute should provide that: No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his or her free consent to medical or scientific experimentation. The provision is called for the persons with disabilities are often thought to be less than full human beings and are subjected to experiments without information and consent. Liberty: Government should ensure that persons with disabilities Are not deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, and that any deprivation of liberty is in conformity with the law, and that the existence of a disability shall in no case justify a deprivation of liberty. The provision is in sync with convention and is required as the existence of a disability more often than not, becomes a justifying ground for depriving a person essential liberties like freedom of expression of movement etc. To ensure these and other freedoms, it is not only required to secure them by adopting general measures, but some disability specific measures have also to be put in place. For instance, freedom of speech and expression for blind person looses its meaning, if she is not provided with information in accessible format and such a freedom becomes meaningless for a hearing/speech impaired person if he is not provided the means to express thoughts in the way he can and they be made manifest to all in format accessible to non-deaf, for instance by interpreting sign language. So, this subject is as vital as it is vast, and needs an in-depth elaboration and implementation. Education Proposed education reform commission is a welcome development. However, its mandate must also include putting in place practices and systems to best ensure inclusiveness of all persons with disabilities in education. It may also suggest best suitable assistance in various settings. All capablizing measures called reasonable accommodation including deployment of technology and human support should be used for the purpose, without essentially altering the nature of basic process and aims of education and qualities assessed. For instance, substituting written exam with audio recording for visually challenged is totally unwelcome, giving human support for writing in form of scribe, or allowing technology like computers for writing are desired approaches. The preconditions for any human support including scribes and interpreters should only be that she/he should not be eligible to appear for the same exam when she/he is so acting, or should not have been so eligible. This should be explicitly provided in the statute and should not be left to policy or bylaws. 5% Reservation in educational institutions with 2% for girls with disabilities and additional 1% for children of parents with disabilities are welcome provisions. However, following disability provisions including reservation should be made preconditions for recognition of any educational institutions. Withdrawing recognition or withholding grants must be posited as normative penalties for ensuring implementation. Scholarships on the ground of disability be given in addition to and not in exclusion to scholarships on other grounds like merit and caste. Fee for higher education and professional courses for students with disabilities be reimbursed by state on the lines of similar provisions for SC and ST students. Work employment occupation Application of reservation provision to private sector is welcome, but legally, there are many hurdles to be overcome in giving it statutory sanction. Following article 12 jurisprudence in defining establishment also will go a long way but it also cannot assure employment non discrimination in private sector. For this, we suggest that private players receiving any sort of aid/concessions from government like Special economic zones etc. be mandated to follow disability non discrimination provisions including reservation and nondispensation. Similarly, private entities providing public utility services earlier provided by government like telecommunication, ensurance, aviation, etc. be also similarly mandated. It can be constitutionally and legally accomplished. While applying the principle of equal pay for equal work to disabled, provision should be more specific allowing for reasonable differences in output linked to disability until disability is suitably and fully compensated in work environment by reasonable accommodation. Provision for exemtion in existing section 47 providing for non dispensation on the ground of disability acquired while in the job and no discrimination in promotion on the ground of disability, should be deleted. No establishment should be exempted from this mandatory provision. The phrase in existing section 47 "disability acquired in the course of employment" be substituted with "if a person acquires disability while in employment", as the former phrase has given rise to erroneous interpretation that disability acquired must be linked to performance of work duties. Reservation in promotion must be provided for, for without it concretizing the mandate that no discrimination in promotion can be done on the basis of disability, becomes almost impossible. While making reservation in promotion, even zone of consideration should be extended for employees with disabilities on the lines of SC and ST. We reiterate our following suggestions: Saying merely that roster system should be followed reflects no thought on the part of subcommittee. In fact, following roster system for disabled is self-defeating, confusing it with general roster system. In fine, 5/6% of total cadre strength in all four classes of jobs should be filled by disabled, this should be the goal. Recruitment has to be by reserving percentage of vacancies occurring in all posts at a given time. This recruitment is facilitated by identification of posts and need not be confined to them only. Nobody should be refused employment on the ground of disability if it is demonstrated that work can be performed by suitable technical assistance or alternative methods. For this, panels at the national and other levels have to be constituted, which should decide controversial cases. They should be interdisciplinary panels with representation from persons with disabilities. Burden of such reasonable accommodation or enabling environment should be born by mainly estate and grants for it be given to private players. Persons qualifying in vertical lists including open competition should not be marked against reserved vacancies, provided they have not taken benefit of any relaxed standards. Reasonable accommodation like scribes, extra time, concession in fee, be differentiated from relaxed standards like relaxation in qualifying marks, upper age limit, etc. Persons wit low vision or mildly visually impaired whatever they called be deemed to be separate category for reservation and 0.5% reservation be provided for them. In fact, reservation for each disability be bifurcated into that for mildly/moderately disabled on one hand, and severely disabled on the other, as severely disabled have not received any benefit out of present system of reservation, and are, as a rule not selected for any posts. This is more apparent in case of blind, where a separate category of low vision exists, but reservation is for blind/low vision. This is a brief view, subcommittee should deliberate upon it suitably and come up with workable provisions... . Carried forward vacancies should form a separate lot and should not be merged with future vacancies in recruitments. Reservation in promotion should be provided. If intervening posts are not identified, that's not a problem in new approach as identification is not the sole basis for recruitment or working of disabled. But in any case, due reasonable accommodation should be provided for such unidentified posts, and they be deemed as identified. Medical standards for any post should take cognizance of disability and whether a disabled can work by making enabling environment even though not fulfilling those medical standards on account of disability. Only medical doctors cannot decide such issues and national level panels as suggested are required. The fact that environment cannot be made so enabling at present, is not a factor for denying the job. Efforts be made for making it so, and meanwhile person should be as productive as she can. Supreme court ruling denying promotion to disabled on grounds of safety, security of machinery and colleagues, efficiency etc. needs to be clearly negated, by constitutional amendment, if the need be. Persons with disabilities should be exempt from routine transfer and their request for postings to place of choice be given utmost priority. Health Medical insurance to persons with disabilities should be provided by state and should not be linked to their being below or above poverty line. Disability itself constitutes a valid ground for backwardness and BPL prescription is not required as disability involves what Prof. Amartya sen has termed "Conversion costs". It means despite incurring expenses they may not be adequately transformed into corresponding elevation in living standards of disabled persons due to various factors. Being Below poverty line is anyway ground for affording medical insurance and so, existence of disability per se, be regarded adequate for medical insurance. Insurance should cover disability specific treatments also in addition to general health needs. Awareness raising is welcome but it should be equally employed for all disabilities and not confined to inappropriate depiction of mental illness only. Menace of fake disability certificates be dealt with sternly by making it penal offence to issue it and have it issued or be in any way linked with its issuance and also to use it at any place and avail any benefits/facility on the basis of such certificate. Disability certificate should serve as proof of disability for availing all government facilities without undergoing any other formalities and procedures may be put in place for dealing with situations where a public servant acting in good faith has suspicion about authenticity of certificate so produced. Health rights fall under right to life and it should include all rectification and alleviation measures for impairment like corneal transplant cochlear implant etc. to be performed by state. Culture sports and recreation Law should clearly mandate that at least 5% funds by all government literary and art bodies like sahitya academies, etc. be spent on promoting such activities in disabled and making them equal participants in such activities at general level. Separate recognition of disability discourse in literature and other arts be encouraged at par with movements like dalit literature etc. Recognition and prizes be instituted to encourage and award persons with disabilities engaged in artistic and literary pursuits. Certain percentage of Grants be given to artists with disabilities to further their talents. Women and children with disabilities Adequate provisions to address double vulnerability of women and children with disabilities on the lines of UNCRPD articles 6 and 7 be enacted. Example: they may be given priorities in all schemes meant for disabled. Example: Higher sentence be prescribed for offences against women with disabilities like rape, domestic violence, extracting child labour from disabled children etc. Offences and penalties fake disability certificates: Issuing fake disability certificates or Making use of fake disability certificates should be declared a criminal offence warranting exemplary punishment in addition to forfeiting any benefit like job etc. obtained by producing such a fake certificate. Mentioning the extent or percentage of disability well beyond the actual disability should also be included in the definition of faking a certificate. no negative presumption: No negative, harmful, exclusionary or discriminatory presumption be drawn or denial be affected on the basis of disability in respect of rights, amenities or facilities offered to public at large or citizens and any exclusion of the disabled there from not duly supported by law be deemed an penal offence. The provision is required in the statute, as many a times, persons with disabilities are arbitrarily deprived even the general amenities offered to public at large or a section thereof, even though their disability is not a relevant factor in denying such amenities. Such examples include admission to many courses, unescorted railway tickets, entry to certain areas, refusing unreserved job posts etc. Monetary penalty should be retained in cases of willful default and be linked to the cost of thing not done and some penal measure. Disability disputes redressal forum or any other adjudicatory bodies established by the new act should have powers to impose such penalties and recover them as well, in addition to awarding specific relief or compensation to disabled litigants. Penalty on arbitrariness: If it is pronounced by the competent authority that an official exceeded his jurisdiction which resulted in breach of this law, and further caused difficulty to the disabled as a result, such official should be personally penalized and the same should be recorded in his service file. portrayal of disability and disabled persons: Derogatory or irrelevant negative portrayal of disability be made ground of censorship and film certification board should have a disabled member on it. Abusing in the name of disability should be declared a criminal offence on the lines of caste abuse. Miscellaneous Mainstreaming disability: Implementing bodies be made more representative of disabled. All constitutional bodies from Parliament to Panchayat to have at least one disabled representative. Articles 15 & 16 of Constitution be amended to Prohibit discrimination on basis of disability per se. Disability budgeting on lines of gender budgeting be implemented. Art. 17 of constitution be amended to wipe practice of disability exclusion on analogy with prohibition of untouchability. Prevention of atrocities act for disabled On the lines of SC atrocity prevention act, be enacted Abuse, verbal or non-verbal, in the name of disability be declared an offence. central and state level monitoring: Apart from changing nomenclature, these monitoring mechanisms be made accountable for implementation of the act, collectively. While nominating nine persons with disabilities on Central and state advisory board as proposed in amendments, phrase, as far as practicable, be employed only in respect of mentally retarded, and all other disabilities be represented essentially by persons having that disability. Nine and not five, persons with disabilities, representing all disabilities in a single nomination period instead of two, be nominated on central and state coordination and monitoring committee, and phrase "as far as practicable" be restricted to mentally retarded. curbing arbitrariness by state governments: Rationale of Disability legislation falling under concurrent list, so Central law prevailing unless state law assented to, or PWD Act enacted Under article 253, be employed to negate varied state interpretations harmful to disabled and uniformity be brought in implementation of disability legislation. Any move by state governments to which takes away from the provisions of the act should be explicitly prohibited. The provision is necessary in wake of some states like maharashtra carving out arbitrary additional categories of disabilities like Partially sighted, in addition to those mentioned in the disabilities act, and even not identifying posts for totally blind which are explicitly identified for them by central government. Government Schemes: Disability be factored in while making any government scheme. All existing government schemes should be evaluated from disability perspective continuously. Disability audit of all the schemes irrespective of the fact whether they are primarily intended for disabled or not, must be made mandatory. Special schemes for disabled US43 of existing PWD act be framed and implemented. national fund for persons with disabilities: Creation of National fund for persons with disabilities proposed in amendments is welcome. Five members nominated by central government to represent different disabilities on the governing body of the fund under section 68D {1(viii)} must be persons with disabilities themselves. Uses of the fund be prescribed in greater detail. All additional expenses in securing rights to persons with disabilities under disability law, like reasonable accommodation, be made legitimate uses of fund. optional protocol: The committee should recommend that Optional protocol to the convention be immediately adopted by India. Even small countries like bangladesh have done so, and we perceive no reason why India should shy away from signing the optional protocol. The fact that it has not done so for any other convention, is not a sound ground for refusing to break new grounds and signing and ratifying the protocol for the convention on the rights of the disabled, as it would open up direct avenue to approach the committee in cases of unredressed violation of rights of the disabled. we can perceive in India's refusal, a US like snobbish mentality that says we would not sign the convention as our standards are superior to those laid down in it. India is doing so for protocol. universal disability audit: Audit of government funds including grants to All NGOs and all other expenditure should include details of expenditure for persons with disabilities, as they are one of the weakest classes in society and every activity touches them. Putting disabled at par with SC/ST As a rule, persons with disabilities be given all relaxations and concessions at par with weakest sections of society like Shceduled castes and tribes. Many times, relaxed standards in qualifying marks and upper age etc. are prescribed for SC/ST but not specifically for persons with disabilities. So, it must be made mandatory for all bodies to offer similar relaxations for PWDs as well. A recent delhi HC judgment clearly layed down that Disabled cannot be treated at par with SCs for relaxed qualifying marks in absence of any legal mandate for the same. Yours sincerely (Rajesh Asudani) National Vice President BGFI (Dr. Vinod Asudani) National Hon. Secretary BGFI (Dr. Shirish Deshpande) Prof. & Head Post Graduate Department of Law, RTMNU, Nagpur (in personal capacity) Nagpur October 18, 2010 -----Original Message----- From: Bhushan Punani [mailto:blinab...@bsnl.in] Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:13 PM To: Rajesh H. Asudani; Bhushan Punani; anand...@gmail.com; Jayshree raveendran; sdr...@gmail.com; L Govinda Rao; srikala.bhar...@gmail.com; Merry Barua; G. Syamala; rajive raturi; Uma Tuli; malabik...@yahoo.com; mita...@gmail.com; S.Y Kothari; s.khun...@nic.in; K.G Verma; chandan.mukher...@gmail.com; pi...@nic.in; Poonam Natrajan; rehab...@ndc.vsnl.net.in; Director IPH; k Ramakrishna; Rajiv Rajan; Bhargavi Davar; bvda...@gmail.com; torchbearer...@gmail.com; ak...@senseintindia.org; jpgadk...@gmail.com; Menon; as_naraya...@hotmail.com; Major HPS Ahluwalia; r.desir...@nic.in Dr Arbind Prasad; Sudha Kaul Subject: Re: Comments on disability law drafting subcommittee reports Thanks Mr. Rajesh Asudani for making very valuable comments on different chapters including chapter on Education. Thanks for confirming most of provisions which the Sub Committee on Education has included in the chapter. I am pleased to respond to some of the comments as follow: 1. You idea regarding establishing "Multi-disciplinary Admission Committees" for deciding controversial cases regarding admission to various courses is worth appreciating. We expect this part will be convered by "Committee on Authorities." It is advisable to have single authority under the New Act for redressal of all the Grievances under the Act. We are confident that commitee on "Authority" will address this issue regarding authority on deciding the nature of disability eligible to be admitted to a particular course. 2. We shall include your idea regarding reimbursement of fee in case of professional courses as is being done in case of SC 3. Your idea about secondary education upto Secondary level is fine and we shall modify the relevant sections accordingly. 4. Actually developing guidelines in case of amanuensis will be part of "Rule and Regualtions" under the Act. The large committee is already considering to make a recommendation that the exising drafting committee should also be involved while drafting the rules under the Act. 5. "Books in accessible format" is already a part of chapter on education. I must thank you once again for sparing so much time and making comments on all the chapters on which presentations have already been made. With best wishes, Bhushan Punani ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rajesh H. Asudani" <rasud...@gmail.com> To: "Bhushan Punani" <blinab...@sancharnet.in>; <anand...@gmail.com>; "Jayshree raveendran" <j.raveend...@abilityfoundation.org>; <sdr...@gmail.com>; "L Govinda Rao" <drgovinda...@gmail.com>; <srikala.bhar...@gmail.com>; "Merry Barua" <actionforaut...@gmail.com>; "G. Syamala" <syamal...@gmail.com>; "rajive raturi" <rajive.rat...@hrln.org>; "Uma Tuli" <amarj...@del2.vsnl.net.in>; <malabik...@yahoo.com>; <mita...@gmail.com>; "S.Y Kothari" <kothari...@yahoo.com>; <s.khun...@nic.in>; "K.G Verma" <kgverm...@yahoo.co.in>; <chandan.mukher...@gmail.com>; <pi...@nic.in>; "Poonam Natrajan" <poonat...@yahoo.com>; <rehab...@ndc.vsnl.net.in>; "Director IPH" <dir...@nic.in>; "k Ramakrishna" <nabinfocen...@yahoo.co.in>; "Rajiv Rajan" <dlu.so...@gmail.com>; "Bhargavi Davar" <camhp...@gmail.com>; <bvda...@gmail.com>; <torchbearer...@gmail.com>; <ak...@senseintindia.org>; <jpgadk...@gmail.com>; "Menon" <paltime...@yahoo.co.in>; <as_naraya...@hotmail.com>; "Major HPS Ahluwalia" <chair...@isiconline.org>; "r.desir...@nic.in Dr Arbind Prasad" <arbindpras...@gmail.com>; "Sudha Kaul" <sudha.k...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 2:46 PM Subject: Comments on disability law drafting subcommittee reports > Madam / Sir > Hope you would go through the comments and ponder over the points. > Rajesh Asudani > Assistant General Manager > Reserve Bank of India > Nagpur > Notice: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If you have received this email by error, please notify us by return e-mail or telephone and immediately and permanently delete the message and any attachments. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The Reserve Bank of India accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in