RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY vs. UNION OF INDIA

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 132 OF 2016 RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS.   …PETITIONER(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.           …RESPONDENT(S) WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 876 OF 2017 J U D G M E N T A.M. KHANWILKAR, J. These petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India 1. are filed in representative capacity, to espouse the cause of teachers having B.Ed. (Special) and D.Ed. (Special) degree/diploma courses and fully trained to cater to the requirements of Children/Child Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by NEETU KHAJURIA Date: 2021.10.28 13:12:00 IST Reason: 1 with Special Needs   also known as     including to impart Divyang, 1  for short, “CwSN” 2 them education and make them independent.   The thrust of the grievance   in   the   writ   petition(s)   is   about   the   illegality   being committed by the concerned State and its Authorities in employing them in recognised schools on contract basis without any certainty of tenure .  According to the petitioners, there is a need to appoint 73,888 special teachers on regular basis to teach 3,69,443 CwSN in the State of Uttar Pradesh and equally large number in the State of Punjab so as to fulfil the required pupil­teacher ratio i.e., 5:1. 2. It   is   urged   that   despite   knocking   doors   of   the   concerned Authorities repeatedly, no heed has been given to their demands and most of them have been appointed on contractual basis in different schools.    This  is  despite the obligation  of the  State to ensure   that   pupil­teacher   ratio   is   maintained   in   the   recognized schools,   by   appointing   adequate   number   of   trained   teachers on regular post.   The principal reliefs prayed in Writ Petition (Civil) No.132 of 2016 are as follows: “(a)     Issue   a   writ,   order   or   direction   in   the   nature   of mandamus, commanding the respondents to ensure the free and compulsory education to each and every CWSN (Child with   Special   Need)/Disabled   Children   as   per   the   Rules, 3 Regulation and Schemes stated above by initiating the process of appointment of Special Teachers as per the Teacher­Pupil ratio i.e. 1:5; and/or (b)    Issue   a   writ,   order   or   direction   in   the   nature   of Mandamus,   commanding   the   respondents   to   reserve   and create, at least (sic) two posts or minimum number of posts in each and every schools of the Country/State, as this Hon’ble Court   may  deem   fit  in  the interest  of  complete  justice  for CWSN (Child with Special Need)/Disabled Children; and/or (c)  Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents to reserve a minimum number of   posts   which   this   Hon’ble   Court   may   deem   fit,   in   every pending vacancy and future vacancies of the teachers, in the schools   of   aided   by   State   Government   as   well   as   Central Government; and/or, ..…” Similarly, the reliefs claimed in Writ Petition (Civil) No.876 of 2017, are as follows: “(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondents to ensure the free and compulsory education to each and every CWSN (Child with Special Need)/Disabled Children as per the Rules, Regulation and Schemes stated above  by   initiating   the  process  of   appointment   of Special Teachers as per the Teacher­Pupil ratio i.e. 1:5; and/or, (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents to reserve and create, atleast two posts or minimum number of posts   in   each   and   every   schools   of   the Country/State, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of complete justice for CWSN (Child with Special Need)/Disabled Children; and/or, (c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to  create and appoint 18053 Special Teachers for class I to V and   1478   Special   Teachers   for  class   IX   to   XII 4 immediately   as   they   are   required   to   teach disabled   children   in   the   Schools   of   Punjab particularly under the circumstances, till date not even a single special teacher has been appointed in the schools of State of Punjab to teach physically disabled children/Child with Special Need (CWSN). (d)  Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents to reserve a   minimum   number   of   posts   which   this   Hon’ble Court may deem fit, in every pending vacancy and future vacancies of the teachers, in the schools of aided   by   State   Government   as   well   as   Central Government; and/or, (e)     Issue   an   interim   order   and   direction, commanding the Respondents to use and utilise the skill   and   eligibility   of   the   writ   petitioners,   having requisite   training   and   certificate   from   the Rehabilitation Council of India, in the welfare and justice   of   enrolled   CWSN   (Child   with   Special Need)/Disabled Children, stated above, and/or; (f)   Grant any other consequential relief admissible under  law, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.” (emphasis supplied) 3. This Court issued notice to the respondents on 8.3.2016 only in reference to prayer clauses (a) and (b) of Writ Petition (Civil) No.132   of   2016,   reproduced   above.     As   the   matter   proceeded further, on 14.7.2017, the Court noted thus: “Mr. D.K. Singh, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Uttar Pradesh prays for four weeks time to file the counter affidavit. At this juncture, Mr. K. Parameshwar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that it is the obligation of the State to conduct a survey with regard to the children 5 with special needs. As we are granting time to the State to file the counter affidavit, it shall carry out the survey with regard to the children with special needs as far as practicable and put   forth   the   same   as   a   part   of   the   counter   affidavit.   To explicate, if the State is not in a position to do it for the entire State, at least it may do for one of the Commissionerate to start with. Let the matter be listed on 21.8.2017.” 4. On the next date, i.e., 21.8.2017, on the basis of submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the Court noted thus: “It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that to impart training to the children with special needs, the State   is   taking   steps   to   recruit   teachers   with   diploma   in special education who are eligible to teach the specially abled children. Needless to say, filling up the posts of teachers is one aspect. There are other aspects which are to be taken care of. Learned counsel for the State shall keep in view the order dated 14.7.2017 which mentions with regard to the children with special needs and their requirements. Keeping that in view,   a   further   affidavit   be   filed   by   the   Secretary   of   the concerned Department within three weeks hence. List the matter after three weeks. Liberty to mention.” 5. Again on 18.9.2017, the Court noted the submissions of the learned counsel and observed thus: “It   is   submitted   by   Mr.D.K.Singh,   learned   Additional Advocate General for the State of U.P. that teachers in certain schools meant for children with special needs and in certain normal schools where the children of that category can come with the mainstream have not been appointed. In the course of hearing it is submitted that the selection process for more than 1200 teachers is in progress and need 6 for additional schools where children with special needs and the teachers for the said schools and also for normal school children   can   fit   in   to   the   mainstream   is   a   categorical imperative. The Secretary, Primary  Education, shall file an affidavit in this regard within two weeks hence. The affidavit to be   brought   on   record   shall   indicate   the   nature   of advertisement   issued   for   appointment   and   also   the   list   of appointees, if any. List on 23rd October, 2017.” 6. As the matter proceeded further, on 23.10.2017, the Court recorded the submissions of the parties and observed thus: “It   is   submitted   by   Ms.Aishwarya   Bhati,   learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Uttar Pradesh that   the   State   is   committed   to   impart   education   to   the children   with   special   needs.   On   the   previous   occasion,   a statement was made that the State had already commenced the procedure for engaging 12,000 teachers out of which some shall be the teachers for children with special needs. Having heard Mr.K.Parameshwar, learned counsel for the petitioner   and   Ms.Aishwarya   Bhati,   learned   Additional Advocate General for the State of Uttar Pradesh, we are of the prima facie  view that the children with special needs have to be imparted education not only by special teachers but there has to be special schools for them. Access to education has already been regarded as a Fundamental Right as per Article 21A of the Constitution. There is a statutory obligation under the Rights of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.   It   is   impossible   to   think   that   the   children   who   are disabled   or   suffer   from   any   kind   of   disability   or   who   are mentally   challenged   can   be   included   in   the   mainstream schools for getting education. When we say ‘disability’, we do not   mean  ‘disability’  as  has  been  defined   in  the   Rights  of Persons  with Disabilities  Act,  2016. The  Rights  of  Persons with   Disabilities   Act,   2016   includes   certain   physical disabilities which may not be a warrant for getting admission in special schools. The students who suffer from blindness, deafness   and   autism   or   such   types   of   disorder   may   be 7 required   to   have   separate   schools   with   distinctly   trained teachers. The State shall file an affidavit keeping our observations in view within four weeks. Needless to say that the affidavit shall   also   mention   when   the   State   is   going   to   meet   this obligation. List on 27.11.2017.” Further, on 4.12.2017, the Court after referring to the affidavit 7. filed by the Special Secretary, Primary Education, Government of Uttar Pradesh and the submissions made across the Bar, noted thus: “In pursuance of our earlier order, an affidavit has been filed by the Special Secretary Primary Education, Government of U.P., Lucknow. It is stated in the affidavit that the State of U.P. is keen to have   special   schools   having   special   teachers   for   imparting education to the disabled children who cannot be imparted education in normal schools. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State of U.P. relying on the affidavit and the instructions has submitted that sixteen special schools have already been established and the teachers have been appointed and presently the schools are functional. The special schools are imparting education to visually   impaired,   hearing   and   speech   impaired,   mentally disabled and physically disabled children. It is submitted by her that the schools have residential facilities and they also admit   students   who   belong   to   non­residential   category.   A chart has been filed indicating to the said effect. We   have   been   apprised   that   seven   schools   for   visually impaired   are   situated   in   Lucknow,   Gorakhpur,   Banda, Saharanpur   and   Meerut   and   five   schools   for   hearing   and speech  impaired  in Gorakhpur,  Bareilly,  Agra,  Farukhabad and Lucknow. As far as the mental disability is concerned, there are two schools which are running at Allahabad and 8 Lucknow.   There   are   two   special   schools   for   the   physically disabled at Lucknow and Pratapgarh. That apart, submits Ms. Bhati that seventeen more schools are under construction. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners have drawn our attention to Section 2(m) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (for short, ‘the 2016 Act’). The said provision   defines   “inclusive   education”,   which   reads   as follows:­  “‘inclusive   education’   means   a   system   of   education wherein   students   with   and   without   disability   learn together   and   the   system   of   teaching   and   learning   is suitably adapted to meet the learning needs of different types of students with disabilities”.  Learned counsel have also commended us to Section 16, which reads as follows:­  “16.   Duty   of   educational   institutions .­   The   appropriate Government   and   the   local   authorities   shall  endeavour that all educational institutions funded or recognised by them   provide   inclusive   education  to   the   children   with disabilities and towards that end shall – (i)   admit   them   without   discrimination   and   provide education   and   opportunities   for   sports   and   recreation activities equally with others; (ii)   make   building,   campus   and   various   facilities accessible; (iii) provide reasonable accommodation according to the individual’s requirements;  (iv) provide necessary support individualised or otherwise in   environments   that   maximise   academic   and   social development consistent with the goal of full inclusion; (v) ensure that the education to persons who are blind or deaf   or   both   is   imparted   in   the   most   appropriate languages and modes and means of communication; (vi) detect specific learning disabilities in children at the earliest   and   take   suitable   pedagogical   and   other measures to overcome them; 9 (vii)   monitor   participation,   progress   in   terms   of attainment levels and completion of education in respect of every student with disability; (viii) provide transportation facilities to the children with disabilities and also the attendant of the children with disabilities having high support needs.”  Stress is laid on Sections 16(i) and (iv). Section 17 of the 2016 Act provides for specific measures for promotion and facilitation of inclusive education so that the   students   who   have   been   suffering   from   any   kind   of disability   are   not   kept   away   from   the   main   stream   of education.  Ms. Aishwarya Bhati shall apprise this Court on the next date of hearing by way of an affidavit how the State is going to work   out   the   provisions   of   the   Act   by   providing   inclusive education   in   the   State.   The   affidavit   shall   be   filed   by   the Secretary, Department of Education, Government of U.P. The said authority while filing the affidavit shall keep in view the language employed in Section 3 of the Act which deals with equality   and   non­discrimination.   The   affidavit   shall   also contain the number of disabled children in the State of U.P. and the categories of the disability. Though   an   affidavit   has   been   filed   with   regard   to   the establishment   and   imparting   of   education   to   the   disabled students   who   requires   special   teaching,   yet   we   think   it appropriate   to   get   the   same   verified   by   a   two   Member Committee and, accordingly, we nominate Mr. Rishi Malhotra and Mr. Gopal Shankaranarayanan, learned counsel, as the members of the Committee, who shall visit the schools and file a report within six weeks hence. The State of U.P. shall make all arrangements for the visit and assessment by Committee. List the matter in the third week of January, 2018.” On this day, the Court appointed an   Amicus Curiae   to visit the schools and file a report within six weeks.  Pursuant to that order, learned  Amicus Curiae  submitted a detailed report on the basis of 10 factual position noted during his visit to the concerned schools.  He also handed over a chart highlighting the problems or deficiencies noticed by him in the respective schools concerning class strength, teachers’ ratio and other facilities, that has been taken note of by this Court in the order dated 7.3.2019, which reads thus: “Mr. Rishi Malhotra, learned Amicus Curiae has handed over a chart highlighting the problems or deficiencies noticed by him in the respective schools concerning the Class strength, teachers’ ratio and other facilities. The same reads thus: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.132 OF 2016

11

12

13

14

15

Learned Additional Advocate General for the State of U.P., on instructions, submits that some of the deficiencies have already been cured and steps are being taken to address all other   problems   noted   in   this   Chart   and   including   other matters for strengthening the concerned schools for specially abled students. She submits that some more time is required to report compliance to this Court. We have no difficulty in acceding   to   the   request   made   by   the   learned   counsel. However, we direct the Chief Secretary, State of U.P. to file an affidavit   providing   for   timelines   within   which   all   the deficiencies in the concerned sixteen special schools would be redressed. The timelines should be realistic and ensure that the schools are made fully functional in all respects before the next academic year. The affidavit be filed within three weeks. Needless to mention that the essential facilities can be put in place only if adequate fund allocation is made in that regard. Since the Chief Secretary has been directed to file an affidavit of compliance and to provide timelines within which the deficiency will be cured, we have no manner of doubt that even   that   issue   will   be   addressed   by   the   Chief   Secretary appropriately. Besides the proposed affidavit, the Chief Secretary must take   measures   to   set   up   a   nodal   authority   which   would continually supervise and monitor the progress of work within the timelines specified in the affidavit. The nodal authority may   consist   of   high   ranking   officials   of   the   concerned Departments   such   as   Finance   Department,   Education Department and Divyang Jan Sashaktikaran Department. List the matter on 03.04.2019.” 16 8. The Court had granted time to the respondent­State(s) to take corrective measures.  When the matter was notified on 4.4.2019, it was reported that substantial measures have been taken in terms of the   Scheme   of   Integrated   Education   for   the   Disabled   Children 2 1992 .  The order reads thus: “We have perused the affidavit dated 01.04.2019 filed by the Chief Secretary, State of Uttar Pradesh in pursuance to our order dated 07.03.2019. We are happy to note that, effective measures have been provided   for   as   indicated   in   the   Scheme   of   Integrated Education for the Disabled Children 1992 and the plan for implementation thereof. We have no difficulty in giving two months’ time to the State Government to comply with the assurance given to the Court on affidavit. However, we expect the Chairman of the nodal Committee to submit periodical report to this Court on monthly basis. List the matters on 10th July, 2019. We are conscious of the fact that some of the time­lines transcend beyond two months but we deem it appropriate to list the matters on 10th July, 2019 as the progress already done can be reviewed and appropriate directions be given, if required.” 9. As   the   matter   proceeded   further,   on   4.10.2019,   learned Amicus Curiae  informed the Court about further steps taken by the Uttar Pradesh State Government.   The same was recorded in the following words: 2  for short, “1992 Scheme” 17 “Learned counsel for the State has tendered compliance affidavit.   An   advance   copy   of   the   compliance   affidavit   was served on the learned Amicus Curiae. Learned Amicus Curiae submits that, on perusal of the compliance affidavit, it is evident that substantial compliance has been done except in respect of two schools i.e. Mentally Challenged School Girls, Lucknow and Hearing and Speech Impaired School Gorakhpur. Details about further course of action   with   regard   to   those   two   schools   has   not   been mentioned in the compliance affidavit. We expect the competent authority to place on record the follow up steps taken in regard to the two schools before the next date. List the matter after four weeks.” Another relevant order passed in the proceedings, which needs 10. to be adverted to, is order dated 4.2.2021, the same reads thus: “Heard   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner,   Mr.   Shoeb Alam and Mr. Rishi Malhotra, learned Amicus Curiae. Amongst   other   issues,   the   central   point   urged   by   the petitioners is about the obligation of the schools, including of the concerned State Government to ensure appointment of duly qualified special teachers to impart quality training to the child  with disability  in  the  ratio  enunciated  in  the  central enactments as also the schemes propounded by the Central Government from time to time and service conditions of such teachers. The   incidental   issue   that   needs   to   be   examined   is whether the central scheme(s) relied upon by the State can be taken   forward   if   the   same   is   not   in   consonance   with   the subsequent enactments in the form of the Right of Children to Free   and   Compulsory   Education   Act,   2009,   the   Rights   of Persons   with   Disability   Act,   2016   and   the   Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992. Needless   to   observe   that   the   interpretation   of   the provisions of the stated acts and of the central scheme(s) may 18 have bearing on dispensation to be provided by all the States and the Union Territories. Resultantly, we deem it appropriate to issue notice to the learned Attorney General for India, returnable on 23.02.2021.” In this order, the Court articulated the central issue that needs to be addressed at the outset.   The arguments made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties were considered.   11. The   crucial   issue   is   about   the   extent   of   obligation   of   the recognized   schools   imparting   primary   and   secondary   level education  to  children  below   the   age   of   14   years,   and   CwSN  in particular (including in the special schools established to impart education and training to CwSN), in light of the central enactments and the schemes governing the pupil­teacher ratio, as propounded by the appropriate authority from time to time, for imparting quality education.  The standards to be observed by the schools imparting primary   and   secondary   level   education   are   governed   by   the municipal regulations and were essentially a State subject.   They have been placed in the Concurrent List by the Constitution (Forty­ second Amendment) Act, 1976. 19 12. With   a   view   to   address   the   growing   concern   about   the disadvantages suffered by the handicapped persons in every walk of life including education, the Parliament enacted a law titled “The 3 Rehabilitation   Council   of   India   Act,   1992”   to   provide   for   the 4 constitution of the Rehabilitation Council of India ,   for regulating and   monitoring   the   training   of   rehabilitation   professionals   and personnel;   promoting   research   in   rehabilitation   and   special education; the maintenance of a Central Rehabilitation Register; and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.    The expressions relevant for consideration of this case, as defined in the said Act when enacted, read thus: “ 2. Definitions .—(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, — 5 (c) “handicapped”  means a person­ (i) visually handicapped; (ii) hearing handicapped; (iii) suffering from locomotor disability; or (iv) suffering from mental retardation; 3  for short, “1992 Act” 4  for short, “Council” 5 Stands substituted by Rehabilitation Council of India (Amendment) Act (38 of 2000), S. 3 (Recd. President’s assent on 4­9­2000) to the following effect: ­ (c) “handicapped” means a person suffering from any disability referred to in clause (i) of section 2 of the Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (1 of 1996) 20 6 (d) “hearing   handicap”   means   deafness   with   hearing impairment of 70 decibels and above, in the better or total loss of hearing in both ears; 7 (e) “locomotor disability”   means a person’s inability to execute distinctive activities associated with moving, both himself and objects, from place to place and such inability resulting from affliction of either bones, joints, muscles or nerves; (h) “mental retardation” means a condition of arrested or incomplete development of mind of a person which is specially   characterised   by   sub­normality   of intelligence; (k) “recognized rehabilitation qualification” means any of the qualifications included in the Schedule; (n) “rehabilitation professionals” means— (i) audiologists and speech therapists; (ii) clinical psychologists; (iii) hearing aid and ear mould technicians; (iv) rehabilitation engineers and technicians; (v) special teachers for educating and training the handicapped ; (vi) vocational   counsellors,   employment   officers and   placement   officers   dealing   with handicapped; (vii) multi­purpose   rehabilitation   therapists, technicians; or  (viii) such   other   category   of   professionals   as   the Central Government may, in consultation with the Council, notify from time to time; 8 (o) “Visually handicapped”  means a person who suffers from any of the following conditions, namely: — (i) total absence of sight; 6 Omitted by Rehabilitation Council of India (Amendment) Act (38 of 2000), S. 3 (Recd. President’s assent on 4­9­2000) 7 Omitted by Rehabilitation Council of India (Amendment) Act (38 of 2000), S. 3 (Recd. President’s assent on 4­9­2000) 8 Omitted by Rehabilitation Council of India (Amendment) Act (38 of 2000), S. 3 (Recd. President’s assent on 4­9­2000) 21 (ii) visual acquity (acuity) not exceeding 6/60 or 20/200   (snellen)   in   the   better   eye   with   the correcting lenses; or (iii) limitation of the field of vision subtending and angle of degree or worse.” (emphasis supplied) 13. The   Council   established   under   the   1992   Act   has   been endowed   with   certain   functions   predicated   in   Chapter   III   under heading ‘Functions of the Council’.   Section 11 of the 1992 Act deals with recognition of qualifications granted by University, etc., in India for rehabilitation professionals.   As noted earlier, special teachers for educating and training the handicapped form part of the   definition   of   “rehabilitation   professionals”   in   Section   2(1)(n) reproduced above. 14. Section 12 of the 1992 Act empowers the Council to recognize qualifications granted by institutions outside India.  What is crucial for our purpose is Section 13, which delineates the rights of persons possessing qualifications included in the Schedule to be enrolled and recognized by the Council.  The same reads thus: “ 13. Rights of persons possessing qualifications included in the Schedule to be enrolled .—(1) Subject to the other provisions contained in this Act, any qualification included in 22

23 15. Two aspects emerge from this provision.   The first is that a rehabilitation professional who possesses prescribed qualification and is so recognized by and enrolled on the Register of the Council alone can practice as rehabilitation professional anywhere in India, including as a special teacher.   That is to say that no other person (not possessing such recognition and not being registered with the Council) can engage himself in serving the handicapped persons, CwSN in particular, or impart education to them, for that would be a contravention  and  punishable under  Section 13(3)  reproduced above.  Indeed, this enactment in a way is a general law, but would still govern the special teachers engaged by any school/institution for imparting education and training to CwSN.     They must fulfil this requirement over and above the qualifications prescribed under the special law concerning registration and recognition of schools and   maintaining   minimum   standards   for   imparting   quality education. 16. With   the   need   to   have   a   formalized   scheme   for   imparting quality education to CwSN in absence of any specific law on that subject, the Union framed the 1992 Scheme.   The recital of the 24 Scheme itself indicates that there was a phenomenal expansion of educational opportunities in the post­independence period, yet the children with disabilities were left out of that growth in educational facilities.  To include CwSN to achieve the goal of education for all, the   1992   Scheme   was   formulated   providing   for   educational opportunities   to  CwSN   in  general  schools   and   to   facilitate   their retention in the school system.  The Scheme further recognized that CwSN who were placed in special schools should also be integrated into general schools, once they acquired the communication and daily living skills at a functional level.   Indisputably, concern was felt as a substantial number of persons with disability in India were not able to pursue even primary/secondary level education much less   to   complete   their   basic   education   in   a   formal   school.     To encourage   them   and   to   facilitate   their   retention   in   the   school system, the 1992 Scheme was propounded.   We are not so much concerned with the other features of the Scheme for deciding the matter in issue, except to advert to the regime specified regarding special teachers and  in  particular, the  pupil­teacher ratio  to be 25 maintained in the concerned schools and their qualifications and training.  The same reads thus:

26

27 organize in­service training courses for general teachers and refresher courses for resource teachers.” (emphasis supplied) On   similar   lines,   Centrally   Sponsored   Scheme   (CSS)   of 17. 9 ‘Inclusive Education of the Disabled at Secondary Stage (IEDSS)’ came to be articulated during the same time. The Parliament also enacted a law to deal with persons with 18. disability titled “The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, 10 Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995” .  This Act, however, stood repealed by the Right of Persons with Disabilities 11 Act, 2016 , which was enacted as a comprehensive legislation to give   effect   to   the   United   Nations   Convention   on   the   Rights   of Persons with Disabilities and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. 19. The Parliament also enacted the National Trust for Welfare of Persons   with   Autism,   Cerebral   Palsy,   Mental   Retardation   and 12 Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999  for the constitution of a body at the national level for the welfare of persons with autism, cerebral palsy, mental   retardation   and   multiple   disabilities   and   for   matters 9  for short, “IEDSS Scheme” 10  for short, “1995 Act” 11  for short, “2016 Act” 12  for short, “1999 Act” 28 connected   therewith   or   incidental   thereto.     The   Statement   of Objects and Reasons of this Act mentions that the Government of India   has   become   increasingly   concerned   about   the   need   for affirmative action in favour of persons with autism, cerebral palsy, mental   retardation   and   multiple   disabilities   and   to   secure   their rights, constituted   a  National   Trust   for   Welfare   of   Persons   with Autism,   Cerebral   Palsy,   Mental   Retardation   and   Multiple 13 Disabilities ,   to   discharge   the   role   as   promotive,   proactive   and protectionist   in  nature   so  as   to   uphold   the   rights,   promote  the development and safeguard the interests of specified persons and their families.  The expression “autism” has been defined in Section 2(a), “cerebral palsy” in Section 2(c), “mental retardation” in Section 2(g), “multiple disabilities” in Section 2(h), “person with disability” in Section 2(j) and “severe disability” in Section 2(o).  The objects of the Trust are spelt out in Section 10, which read thus: “ CHAPTER III OBJECTS OF THE TRUST 10. Objects of Trust .—The objects of the Trust shall be— (a) to enable and empower persons with disability to live as independently and as fully as possible within and as close to the community to which they belong;  13  for short, “Trust” 29 (b) to strengthen facilities to provide support to persons with disability to live within their own families; (c) to extend support to registered organisations to provide need based services during the period of crisis in the family of persons with disability; (d) to deal with problems of persons with disability who do not have family support; (e) to promote measures for the care and protection of persons with   disability   in   the   event   of   death   of   their   parent   or guardian; (f) to evolve procedure for the appointment of guardians and trustees for persons with disability requiring such protection; (g)   to   facilitate   the   realisation   of   equal   opportunities, protection   of   rights   and   full   participation   of   persons   with disability; and (h) to do any other act which is incidental to the aforesaid objects.” The powers and duties of the Board of trustees, procedure for 20. registration of any association of persons with disability, or any association   of   parents   of   persons   with   disability   or   a   voluntary organisation and setting up of local level committees and related matters, have been spelt out in the 1999 Act.  This Act, however, makes no provision regarding the pupil­teacher ratio to be observed by   the   schools   imparting   education   to   CwSN   in   particular. However, that gap has been filled up by the IEDSS Scheme.  Taking cue from the National Policy on Education (NPE), 1986 and the 30 Programme of Action (1992), this Scheme laid down a basic policy framework for education, with emphasis on correcting the existing inequalities.  This Scheme adverts to the fact that India has been a signatory   to   international   declarations   like   the   Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education (1994); the Biwako Millennium Framework for Action (2002), and the   United   Nations   Convention   on   the   Rights   of   Persons   with Disabilities, 2006 which emphasize upon the need for fundamental educational   policy   shifts   in   order   to   enable   general   schools   to include   children   with   disabilities.     The   1992   Scheme   stood subsumed in this Scheme (IEDSS). 21. The IEDSS Scheme recognized that as per Census of 2001 about 2 per cent of the total population of India constituted persons with disabilities.  Further, children with disabilities constituted one of the largest groups that still remained outside the fold of the general education system.  In that backdrop, this Scheme sought to provide all students with disabilities who had completed eight years of elementary schooling, an opportunity to complete four years of secondary schooling (classes IX to XII) in an inclusive and enabling 31 environment, and to provide educational opportunities and facilities to such students in the general education system at the secondary level.  The objectives of this Scheme were to ensure that: “2.   Aims and Objectives ….. The objectives of the scheme will be to ensure that ­ Every   child   with   disability   will   be   identified   at   the secondary level and his educational need assessed. ­ Every student in need of aids and appliances, assistive devices, will be provided the same. ­ All  architectural  barriers  in   schools  are  removed  so that   students   with   disability   have   access   to classrooms,   laboratories,   libraries   and   toilets   in   the school. ­ Each student with disability will be supplied learning material as per his/her requirement ­ All general school teachers at the secondary level will be   provided   basic   training   to   teach   students   with disabilities within a period of three to five years. ­ Students with disabilities will have access to support services   like   the   appointment   of   special   educators, establishment of resources rooms in every block. ­ Model schools are set up in every state to develop good replicable practices in inclusive education.” The Target Group identified in this Scheme have been noted thus: “3. Target Group The scheme will cover all children of age 14+ passing out of   elementary   schools   and   studying   in   secondary   in Government, local body and Government­aided schools, with one or more disabilities as defined under the Persons with Disabilities Act (1995) and the National Trust Act (1999) in the age group 14+ to 18+ (classes IX to XII), namely  Blindness  Low vision  Leprosy cured  Hearing impairment  Locomotor disabilities 32  Mental retardation  Mental illness  Autism  Cerebral Palsy And may eventually cover (i) Speech impairment and (ii) Learning Disabilities, etc. Girls with disabilities will receive special focus and efforts would be made under the scheme to help them gain access to secondary schools, as also to information and guidance for developing their potential.” 22. The IEDSS Scheme,   inter alia , adverts to the training to be given   to   the   special   or   general   school   teachers   to   make   them capable of grooming the CwSN.   As per this Scheme, the special teachers were to be trained through regular programmes run by the National   Institutes/Apex   Institutes   of   the   Council   or   under  any other programmes of the States.   Further, in­service training for resource teachers to equip them with handling of other disability area has been emphasized upon.  As regards the general teachers at the secondary level, they were to be trained in particular strategies like   making   educationally   useful   assessments,   planning   an individualized and need­specific curriculum, teaching styles which include audiovisual aids, appropriate instructional strategies, etc. The   appointment   of   special   educators   has   been   specifically mentioned in the IEDSS Scheme as follows: 33 “5.  Components of the Scheme 5.1  ….. 5.2.II   Costs   of   non­beneficiary­oriented   components   like teacher   training,   construction   and   equipping   of   resource rooms, creating model schools, research and monitoring, etc. will be covered separately.   These components would be as follows: (i) to (v) ….. (vi)     Appointment   of   Special   Educators:   Support   from special educators will differ at the secondary level from that at the elementary level.   Special Educators will be appointed   in   the   ratio   1:5.   Ideally   every   school   where disabled children are enrolled should have the services of at least one special teacher.   If the numbers of children are less, this teacher could also work for other schools in the   cluster .     For   note   on   Appointment   of   Special Educators/Resource Teachers see Appendix III.  (Sr.No.II.1 of Appendix­I). …..” (emphasis supplied) It   is   unnecessary   to   dilate   on   other   aspects   of   the   IEDSS 23. Scheme, as the core issue to be answered by us for the time being is about   pupil­teacher   ratio   to   be   maintained   by   the   schools concerned. 24. The Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Elementary   Education   &   Literacy   also   formulated   a   separate scheme for universal elementary education titled “ Sarva Shiksha 14  2004” , to address the specific concern of CwSN and for Abhiyan encouraging them to take admission in primary schools.  The aims 14  for short, “SSA 2004” 34 and objectives of this Scheme were to provide useful and relevant elementary education for all children in the 6 to 14 age group by 2010, and to bridge social, regional and gender gaps through active participation   of   the   community   in   the   management   of   schools. Clause 4.4 of this Scheme specifically deals with education of CwSN to accomplish the goals set out therein.   Planners checklist has been   delineated   in   Clause   4.4.1   with   appraisers   checklist   for education   of   CwSN   in   Clause   4.4.2.     This   Scheme   has   been subsumed   in   the   subsequent   Scheme   propounded   for   mapping, improvement   of   infrastructure,   upgradation   of   human   resource, and management and facilitating good quality education to CwSN. 25. There   was   a   paradigm   shift   in   the   approach   of   imparting education to children between the age of 6 and 14 years consequent to the enactment of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory 15 Education Act, 2009 .  This Act generally applies to all the schools, be it a general school or a special school.  Further, rights of all the children between the age of 6 and 14 years are governed by this enactment irrespective of their orientation.   This Act attempts to universalise education and to open new vistas for providing free and 15  for short, “2009 Act” 35 compulsory   inclusive   elementary   education   to   all   and   more importantly quality education in the neighbourhood school.  That is the responsibility not only of the schools run or supported by the appropriate   Government,   but   also   of   schools   which   are   not dependent on Government’s funds. 26. The   expression   “child”   has   been   defined   in   Section   2(c)   to mean a male or female child of the age of 6 to 14 years.   The expression   “child   belonging   to   disadvantaged   group”   has   been defined in Section 2(d) as follows: “ 2.   Definitions.— In   this   Act,   unless   the   context   otherwise requires,— (d) “child belonging to disadvantaged group” means   a child with disability  or a child belonging to the Scheduled Caste, the Scheduled Tribe, the socially and educationally backward class or such other group having disadvantage owing to social, cultural, economical, geographical, linguistic, gender or such other   factor,   as   may   be   specified   by   the   appropriate Government, by notification;” (emphasis supplied) The expression “child belonging to weaker section” has been defined in Section 2(e) as under: “ 2.   Definitions.— In   this   Act,   unless   the   context   otherwise requires,— e) “child belonging to weaker section” means a child belonging to such parent or guardian whose annual income is lower than   the   minimum   limit   specified   by   the   appropriate Government, by notification;” 36 Further, the expression “child with disability” has been defined in Section 2(ee), which came into force with effect from 1.8.2012.  The same reads thus: “ 2.   Definitions.— In   this   Act,   unless   the   context   otherwise requires,— (ee) “ child with disability ” includes,— (A) a child with “disability” as defined in clause (i) of section 2   of   the   Persons   with   Disabilities   (Equal   Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (1 of 1996); (B) a child, being a person with disability as defined in clause (j) of section 2 of the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 (44 of 1999); (C) a child with “severe disability” as defined in clause (o) of section 2 of the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 (44 of 1999).” (emphasis supplied) 27. The 2009 Act guarantees right of child to free and compulsory education in a neighbourhood school till the completion of his or her elementary education between the age group of 6 and 14 years. Section 3 as amended vide Act 30 of 2012, reads thus: “ 3. Right of child to free and compulsory education. — (1) Every child of the age of six to fourteen years, including a child referred to in  clause (d)  or clause (e) of section 2, shall have the right to free and compulsory education in a neighbourhood   school   till   the   completion   of   his   or   her elementary education. (2) For the purpose of sub­section (1), no child shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing the elementary education. 37 (3)  A child with disability  referred to in sub­clause (A) of clause   (ee)   of   section   2   shall,   without   prejudice   to   the provisions   of   the   Persons   with   Disabilities   (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (1 of 1996), and a child referred to in sub­clauses (B) and (C) of clause (ee) of section 2,  have the same rights to   pursue   free   and  compulsory   elementary  education which   children   with   disabilities   have   under   the provisions of Chapter V of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal   Opportunities,   Protection   of   Rights   and   Full Participation) Act, 1995 (1 of 1996) : Provided   that   a   child   with   “multiple   disabilities” referred to in clause (h) and a child with “severe disability” referred to in clause (o) of section 2 of the National Trust for Welfare   of   Persons   with   Autism,   Cerebral   Palsy,   Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 (44 of 1999) may   also   have   the   right   to   opt   for   home­based education. ” (emphasis supplied) 28. The extent of a school’s responsibility for free and compulsory education within the meaning of the 2009 Act has been spelt out in Section 12.  The crucial provision for dealing with the core issue is Section 19.  The same reads thus: “ .— (1)  19. Norms and standards for school No school shall be established, or recognized, under section 18, unless it fulfils the norms and standards specified in the Schedule . (2) Where a  school established before the commencement of this Act  does not fulfil the norms and standards specified in the Schedule, it  shall take steps to fulfil such norms and standards at its own expenses, within a period of three years from the date of such commencement . 38 (3)  Where a school fails to fulfil the norms and standards within   the   period   specified   under   sub­section   (2),   the authority  prescribed under sub­section (1) of section 18  shall  in the manner withdraw recognition granted to such school specified under sub­section (3) thereof. (4)   With   effect   from   the   date   of   withdrawal   of   recognition under sub­section (3), no school shall continue to function. (5)   Any   person   who   continues   to   run   a   school   after   the recognition is withdrawn, shall be liable to fine which may extend   to   one   lakh   rupees   and   in   case   of   continuing contraventions, to a fine of ten thousand rupees for each day during which such contravention continues.” (emphasis supplied) 29. The Schedule referred to in Section 19 is part of the 2009 Act, which reads thus:

39

40

(emphasis supplied) 30. It may be useful to also advert to Sections 25, 27 and 28 of the 2009 Act, which read thus: “ 25. Pupil­Teacher Ratio .—(1)  Within three years from the date   of   commencement   of   this   Act,   the   appropriate Government and the local authority shall ensure that the Pupil­Teacher   Ratio,   as   specified   in   the   Schedule,   is maintained in each school . (2) For the purpose of maintaining the Pupil­Teacher Ratio under sub­section (1),   no teacher posted in a school shall be made to serve in any other school or office or deployed for   any   non­educational   purpose,   other   than   those specified in section 27 . 27.   Prohibition   of   deployment   of   teachers   for   non­ educational purposes .—   No teacher shall be deployed for any  non­educational   purposes  other  than   the   decennial population census, disaster relief duties or duties relating to   elections   to   the   local   authority   or   the   State . Legislatures or Parliament, as the case may be .—No teacher 28. Prohibition of private tuition by teacher shall engage himself or herself in private tuition or private teaching activity.” (emphasis supplied) 41 31. In   the   context   of   obligation   of   schools   to   maintain   pupil­ teacher ratio, it may be apposite to advert to Rule 22 of the Right of 16 Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2010 , which reads thus: “ .— (1) The sanctioned 22. Maintaining pupil­teacher ratio strength   of   teachers   in   a   school   shall   be   notified   by   the Central   Government,   appropriate   Government   or   the   local authority, as the case may be, within a period of three months of the appointed date: Provided   that   the   Central   Government,   appropriate Government or the local authority, as the case may be, shall, within three months of such notification, redeploy teachers of schools having strength in excess of the sanctioned strength prior to the notification referred to in sub­rule (1). (2)  If   any   person   of   the   Central   Government,   appropriate Government or the local authority violates the provisions of sub­section (2) of section 25, he or she shall be personally liable for disciplinary action.” 32. Strikingly, the Schedule has not been amended to deal with the   aspirations   and   special   needs   of   the   child   with   disability referred  to  in   Section   2(ee)  —  an  expression  which   came   to  be inserted back in 2012.   The norms and standards for a school specified in the Schedule do not specifically refer to any special arrangement regarding teachers, which are to be made for CwSN by the concerned schools.  In that sense, no specific provision dealing with schools and the norms and standards of the schools governed 16  for short, “2010 Rules” 42 by the 2009 Act in reference to CwSN has been made by the special law. 33. It is unnecessary to underscore that the pupil­teacher ratio to be observed as a minimum norm in any school (be it a general school or special school) for imparting quality education to CwSN, ought to be different than the norms and standards for imparting education   to   general   children/child.       Had   the   2009   Act   made specific provisions while inserting expression “child with disability” as Section 2(ee), in regard to the norms and standards and the ratio of admitted   CwSN  and   number  of   teachers,   that  ought  to  have prevailed.     In   absence   of   an   express   law   in   that   regard,   the provisions of the special law governing the rights of persons with disabilities or the schemes formulated by the Executive, in that regard,  must come  into play;  and  despite  it not being specified norms and standards in Section 3 of the 2009 Act, the school(s) will be obliged to fulfil such condition at the time of seeking recognition from the competent authority and for continuing the same. 34. In light of the above, it would be in the fitness of things that the Central Government itself, in exercise of powers under Section 43 20 of the 2009 Act, take steps to issue a notification to suitably amend the Schedule governing the norms and standards so as to include the ratio for appointing rehabilitation professionals/special teachers in every school admitting CwSN, be it a general school or a special school.  This is crucial because Section 25(2) of the 2009 Act postulates that no teacher posted in a school shall be made to serve in any other school or office or deployed for any non­educational purpose, other than those specified in Section 27.  Once Schedule stands amended, the schools will be obliged to comply with the norms and standards to give effect to the intent of the 2009 Act and fill up vacancies of teachers in the manner specified in Section 26 of the 2009 Act, which reads thus: “ .—The   appointing 26.   Filling   up   vacancies   of   teachers authority,   in   relation   to   a   school   established,   owned, controlled or substantially financed by funds provided directly or   indirectly   by   the   appropriate   Government   or   by   a   local authority, shall ensure that vacancy of teacher in a school under its control shall not exceed ten per cent. of the total sanctioned strength.” It is imperative to provide for an express norm and standard 35. regarding CwSN ­ pupil and teacher ratio to be maintained by the schools concerned, so as to discharge the responsibility fastened in 44 terms of Section 29 regarding curriculum and evaluation procedure, in a holistic and effective manner. 36. Needless   to   observe   that   the   norms   and   standards,   in particular regarding pupil­teacher ratio, specified in the Schedule of the 2009 Act, are only to delineate the minimum benchmark.  It is open to the State Government, being the appropriate Government, to provide for a higher benchmark for ensuring imparting of quality education by the schools within its jurisdiction.   Further, besides the   benchmark   specified   in   the   Schedule   or   by   the   appropriate Government, as the case may be, it is always open to the school management   to   appoint   more   teachers   on   their   own   than   the notified pupil­teacher ratio, if they so desire, for ensuring imparting of quality education to its students. 37. As   aforesaid,   until   the   Schedule   of   the   2009   Act   stands amended, pupil­teacher ratio specified in the enactments governing the   rights   of   the   persons   with   disabilities   or   the   schemes propounded in that regard by the Executive for full participation and   inclusive   education   to   be   imparted   in   the   neighbourhood school, ought to be adhered to. 45 38. More or less on the same lines, a press release was issued by the Ministry of Human Resource Development on 9.9.2010, which reads thus: “Press Information Bureau Government of India Ministry of Human Resource Development =================================================== 09­September­2010 13:13 IST Aligning Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Norms with the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 The   Cabinet   Committee   on   Economic   Affairs   today approved revision of the existing norms of the SSA programme to conform with the RTE Act (Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act). The   Sarva   Shiksha   Abhiyan   (SSA)   Programme,   a   major flagship programme of the Government of India to universalize elementary education in the country, will be the main vehicle for the implementation of the RTE Act. The revisions are as follows: (i) Revision of SSA norms, including provisions for teachers and   classrooms,   support   for   academic   supervision, research, evaluation and monitoring, opening of Kasturba Gandhi   Balika   Vidyalayas   (KGBVs)   to   bring   them   in conformity   with   the   provisions   of   the   RTE   Act   and implement the combined RTE­SSA programme. New norms under   SSA   for   uniforms,   transportation   costs   and residential   schools   to   implement   the   combined   RTE­SSA programme have also been included. (ii) Revision of the funding pattern for the combined RTE­ SSA programme between the Centre and the States in the ratio of 65:35 for all States/UTs; in the case of eight States of NER the existing sharing pattern of 90:10 would however be continue.” 46 Another press release came to be issued on 6.12.2010 by the 39. Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, which reads thus: “Press Information Bureau Government of India Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment =================================================== 06­December­2010 15:53 IST Educational Rights of Children with Disabilities The   steps   taken   by   the   Government   of   India   for implementing   educational   rights   of   the   children   and   the disabled section of the society are as under­ The Right of Children to Free & Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009 has come into force w.e.f. 1st April, 2010. The RTE Act provides for free & compulsory education to children in   the   age   group   of   6­14   years   at   elementary   level   in   a neighbourhood school. Government of India has since aligned the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) norms with the provisions of Right   of   Children   to   Free   and   Compulsory   Education   Act, 2009 and has committed a funding of Rs. 2,31,233 crore for implementation of the combined RTE­SSA programme during the next five years in partnership with the States. SSA   ensures   that   every   child   with   special   needs, irrespective of the kind, category and degree of disability, is provided meaningful and quality education. Hence, SSA has adopted   a   zero   rejection   policy.   This   means   that   no   child having   special   needs   should   be   deprived   of   the   right   to education and taught in an environment, which is best, suited to his/her learning needs. SSA provides upto Rs. 3000 per child for the inclusion of disabled children, as per specific proposal, per year. District plan for children with special needs is formulated within the Rs. 3000 per child norm, with Rs. 1000 earmarked exclusively for engagement of resource teachers. The interventions under SSA for inclusive education are identification, functional and formal   assessment,   appropriate   educational   placement, 47 preparation of Individualised Educational Plan, provision of aids   and   appliances,   teacher   training,   resource   support, removal   of   architectural  barriers,   research,  monitoring   and evaluation and a special focus on girls with special needs. A centrally sponsored scheme of “Inclusive Education for   Disabled   at   Secondary   Stage”   (IEDSS)   has   been implemented   since   1­4­2009   in   place   of   CSS  of   Integrated Education for Disabled Children (IEDC). The objective of the IEDSS scheme is to enable the disabled children who have completed   eight   years   of   elementary   education   to   continue their education at the secondary stage (class IX to XII) in an inclusive environment in regular schools. This information was given by Shri. D. Napoleon, the Minister   of   State   for   Social   Justice   &   Empowerment,   in   a written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha today.” 40. This   is   significant   in   light   of   the   just   stand   taken   by   the Council   to   ensure   that   special   education   teachers   with   proper qualification,   as   approved   and   registered   by   the   Council,   are employed by the schools.  The communication issued on 11.1.2012 reinforces that assertion, which reads thus: “ REHABILITATION COUNCIL OF INDIA (A Statutory Body under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment) =================================================== No.7­91/RCI­2011/ Date 11.01.2012 SPEED POST Address as list Sub: Minimum   requirement   of   RCI   approved qualification   for   appointment   of   Special Education Teachers: reg. 48 Madam/Sir, This is to inform you that the Council has developed the guidelines   for   minimum   requirement   of   RCI   approved qualification for appointment of Special Education Teachers (copy   enclosed).     These   guidelines   supercede   previous circulars/orders issued by the Council and shall come into force with immediate effect. Thanking you, Yours faithfully                                                                         Sd/­ (Dr. J.P. Singh) Member Secretary Encl as above” The above communication has appended guidelines as to minimum requirement of the Council approved qualification for appointment of special education teachers, which need not be reproduced. Just as the 2009 Act ushered in paradigm shift in delivery of 41. right of children to free and compulsory education, the 2016 Act is a comprehensive Act to  repeal the  1995  Act and  infuse further vigour for accomplishment of rights of persons with disabilities.  It takes note of the ratification of the United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) by India in 2007, which lays down certain principles to be followed by the signatory 49 States for empowerment of persons with disabilities.  It requires the signatory States to make appropriate changes in law, as well as, policy   to   give   effect   to   the   principles   of   the   Convention.     The Statement of Objects and Reasons for introducing the law, is a testimony of the commitment of our country to follow the tenets enunciated   in   the   international   Convention   for   empowerment   of persons with disabilities.  The same reads thus: ­ “ STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS The   Persons   with   Disabilities   (Equal   Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 was enacted   to   give   effect   to  the   Proclamation   on   the   Full Participation and Equality of the People with Disabilities in the Asian and Pacific Region.  The Act defines Persons with   Disabilities   as   those   having   not   less   than   forty percent,   disability   and   identified   seven   categories   of disabilities,   namely,   blindness,   low   vision,   hearing impairment,   locomotor   disability,   mental   retardation, mental illness and leprosy­cured. 2. Over   a   period   of   time,   the   conceptual understanding   of   the   rights   of   persons   with disabilities has become more clear and there has been worldwide change in approach to handle the issues concerning   persons   with   disabilities .     The   United Nations adopted its Convention all, the Rights of Persons 50 with Disabilities laying down the principles to be followed by the States Parties for empowerment of persons with disabilities.     India   signed   the   said   Convention   and st subsequently ratified the same on the 1  day of October, rd 2007.  The Convention came into effect on the 3  day of May, 2008.   Being a signatory to the Convention, India has   an   international   obligation   to   comply   with   the provisions   of   the   said   Convention   which   required   an entirely new legislation. 3. In 2010, an Expert Committee constituted under the chairmanship of Dr. Sudha Kaul, Vice­Chairperson, Indian Institute of Cerebral Palsy, Kolkata submitted its report  in   2011,   suggesting   a  Draft   Bill  relating  to  the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.   The draft Bill was extensively debated upon at various levels involving State Governments   and   Union   territories   and   various stakeholders. 4. The salient features of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2014,  inter alia , are: (i) Nineteen   specified   disabilities   have   been defined ; (ii) the   persons   with   disabilities   enjoy   various rights   such   as   right   to   equality,   life   with dignity, respect for his or her integrity, etc., equally with others ; (iii) duties and responsibilities of the appropriate Government have been enumerated ; (iv) all   educational   institutions   funded   by appropriate   Government   shall   provide 51 inclusive   education   to   the   children   with ; disabilities (v) a National Fund is proposed to provide financial support to persons with disabilities; (vi) stakeholders’ participation in the policy making through Central and State Advisory Boards; (vii) increase   in   reservation   in   posts   from   existing three percent, to five percent, in the vacancies for persons   or   class   of   persons   with   benchmark disabilities in every establishment and reservation of seats for students with benchmark disabilities in higher educational institutions; (viii) setting   up   of   National   Commission   and   State Commission   to   act   as   Grievance   Redressal Mechanism,   monitor   implementation   of   the proposed   legislation   replacing   the   Chief Commissioner   and   State   Commissioners   for persons with disabilities, respectively; (ix) guidelines   to   be   issued   by   the   Central Government   for   issuance   of   certificates   of specified disabilities; (x) penalties for offences committed against persons with disabilities; and (xi) Court of Session to be designated as Special Court by the State Government in every district to try offences. 5. The Bill seeks to achieve the above objects.” (emphasis supplied) 52 One of the salutary provisions of the 2016 Act which may have bearing on the issue under consideration, is the definition clause. The expression “barrier” is defined in Section 2(c); “care­giver” in Section   2(d);   “discrimination”   in   Section   2(h);   “high   support”   in Section   2(l);   “inclusive   education”   in   Section   2(m);   “person   with benchmark disability” in Section 2(r); “person with disability having high support needs” in Section 2(t); “public facilities and services” in   Section   2(x);   “rehabilitation”   in   Section   2(za)   and   “specified disability” in Section 2(zc).  As regards the subject of education, the same   can   be   discerned   from   Chapter   III   under   the   heading “Education”.     Section   16   deals   with   “Duty   of   educational institutions”, which reads thus: ­ “ CHAPTER III EDUCATION

53 (ii)  make building, campus and various facilities accessible; (iii)  provide   reasonable   accommodation according to the individual's requirements; (iv)  provide necessary support individualised or otherwise   in   environments   that   maximise academic and social development consistent with the goal of full inclusion; (v)  ensure that the education to persons who are blind or deaf or both is imparted in the   most   appropriate   languages   and ; modes and means of communication (vi)  detect   specific   learning   disabilities   in children   at   the   earliest   and   take   suitable pedagogical and other measures to overcome them; (vii)  monitor participation, progress in terms of attainment   levels   and   completion   of education in respect of every student with disability;” (viii)  provide   transportation   facilities   to   the children   with   disabilities   and   also   the attendant   of   the   children   with   disabilities having high support needs.” (emphasis supplied) Section 17 envisages specific measures to promote and facilitate inclusive education, which reads thus: ­ “ 17.   Specific   measures   to   promote   and   facilitate inclusive education.—  The appropriate Government and the local authorities shall take the following measures for the purpose of section 16, namely:— 54

55

Section  18   casts  obligation  on  the   appropriate  Government  and local authorities  to  make  arrangements  to promote,  protect and ensure participation of persons with disabilities in adult education and   continuing   education   programmes   equally   with   others. Chapter VI of the 2016 Act deals with special provisions for persons with benchmark disabilities.   Section 31 under the said Chapter envisages free education for children with benchmark disabilities. The same reads thus: ­ “ CHAPTER VI 56 SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR PERSONS WITH BENCHMARK DISABIITIES 31.   Free   education   for   children   with   benchmark disabilities.—  (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rights of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act,   2009   (35   of   2009),   every   child   with   benchmark disability between the age of six to eighteen years shall have   the   right   to   free   education   in   a   neighbourhood school, or in a special school, of his choice. (2)   The   appropriate   Government   and   local   authorities shall ensure that every child with benchmark disability has   access   to   free   education   in   an   appropriate environment till he attains the age of eighteen years.” Another   significant   provision   is   reservation   of   seats   in   higher educational institutions being Section 32, which reads thus: ­ “ 32. Reservation in higher educational institutions.— (1) All Government institutions of higher education and other higher education institutions receiving aid from the Government   shall   reserve   not   less   than   five   per   cent. seats for persons with benchmark disabilities. (2) The persons with benchmark disabilities shall be given an upper age relaxation of five years for admission in institutions of higher education.” To   ensure   that   the   concerned   authorities   discharge   their responsibilities   in   the   spirit   of   the   provisions   of   the   2016   Act, Section 74 provides for the appointment of Chief Commissioner and Commissioners   by   the   Central   Government,   and   Section   79 57 empowers the State Government to appoint State Commissioner in concerned State.   The functions of the Chief Commissioner and State Commissioners are more or less similar.   For the sake of convenience, we may advert to Section 80 of the Act, which reads thus: ­

58 (f)  promote awareness of the rights of persons with disabilities and the safeguards available for their protection; (g)  monitor implementation of the provisions of this Act and schemes, programmes meant for persons with disabilities; (h)  monitor utilisation of funds disbursed by the State Government for the benefits of persons with disabilities; and (i)  perform   such   other   functions   as   the   State Government may assign.” (emphasis supplied) Section   81   is   another   significant   provision   which   implicitly mandates the State authority to take necessary action on the basis of recommendation made by the State Commissioner, referred to therein and to submit action taken report within three months from the date of receipt of the recommendation.   This is a peremptory tenet   mandating   the   concerned   authority   to   give   effect   to   the recommendation made by the State Commissioner unless it does not accept it for reasons to be so recorded and conveyed to the State   Commissioner   for   Persons   with   Disabilities   within   three months and also informing the aggrieved person.  Section 81 reads thus: ­ 59 “ 81.   Action   by   appropriate   authorities   on recommendation of State Commissioner.—   Whenever the State Commissioner makes a recommendation to an authority in pursuance of clause  (b)  of section 80, that authority shall take necessary action on it, and inform the State Commissioner of the action taken within three months from the date of receipt of the recommendation: Provided that where an authority does not accept a recommendation,   it   shall   convey   reasons   for nonacceptance   to   the   State   Commissioner   for   Persons with Disabilities within the period of three months, and shall also inform the aggrieved person.” The   State   Commissioner   has   been   endowed   with   the   powers referred to in Section 82 of the 2016 Act to enable him/her to discharge the functions specified in Section 80 of the Act. The 2016 Act, in a way, is a general enactment for giving effect 42. to the rights of persons with disabilities which includes the CwSN. But, when it comes to subject of education, a separate Chapter has been provided for fastening responsibility coupled with duty upon the appropriate Government, local authorities and the concerned educational institutions in matters specified therein (Sections 16 and 17).   The purport of these provisions is to make available a 60 platform to the CwSN to avail the rights of full participation by means  of   inclusive   and   quality   education   in   the   neighbourhood school.   For giving effect to this mandate, it is essential for the concerned authority and more particularly for the schools imparting education to CwSN, to ensure that a just pupil­teacher ratio is maintained without exception, including as specified under the law made by the Parliament or the scheme enunciated by the executive in that regard. 43. It has been noticed that to give effect to the spirit of the 2016 Act, a communication  bearing   No.   CBSE/AFF/Circular  13/2017 dated 13.6.2017, had been sent by the Deputy Secretary (Affiliation) 17 of the Central Board of Secondary Education   to all concerned, directing to follow the provisions of the 2009 Act by appointing special   educators   to   ensure   quality   education   for   all   children including CwSN.  The Circular reads thus: ­  CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION “ No/CBSE/AFF/Circular 13/2017 17  for short, “CBSE” 61 Date: 13.06.2017 SUB: MANDATORY   APPOINTMENT   OF   SPECIAL EDUCATOR IN ALL SCHOOLS­ REG (Ref.­ Circular No. CBSE/ACAD/JS&IC(A&T)/2015: dated 25.06.2015) This   is   in   continuation   to   CBSE   circular   No. CBSE/ACAD/JS&IC(A&T)/2015   dated   25.06.2015.   As per   Rule   No.13.11   of   Affiliation   Bye­Laws   of   Board   in which direction was issued to all the  affiliated schools to mandatory appoint SPECIAL EDUCATORS  to  ensure quality education for all children including children with special needs  as per Section 3, 8(c) and 9(c) of the Right to Education Act, 2009 to facilitate effective and meaningful   inclusion   of   children   with   disabilities   in schools.  However,   it   has   been   observed   that   many   schools affiliated with CBSE are not adhering to the provision concerning   appointment   of   Special   Educators.   In   this connection,  your   attention is  invited  to  Rule  13(11)  of Affiliation Byelaws which provides to promote inclusion of students   with   disabilities/special   needs   in   the   normal school as per provisions of the “Persons with disabilities Act   1995”   and   in   conformity   with   National   Policy   of Education.  In view of above,  the Management and the Head of the   CBSE   affiliated   schools   are   hereby   directed   to strictly   follow   the   above   provisions   and   make arrangement   immediately   to   appoint   special educators   in   their   respective   school(s) .   The   above provision   may   be   brought   to   the   knowledge   of   School Managing Committee for strict compliance.  (Jaiprakash Chaturvedi)  Deputy Secretary (Affiliation)” (emphasis supplied) 62 Even   the   Chief   Commissioner   for   Persons   with   Disabilities   had issued   similar   communication   to   all   concerned   on   25.10.2016 bearing F.No. 11­9/CCD/2016/R4755, which reads thus: ­ “ COURT OF CHIEF COMMISSIONER FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment  Government of India F.No.11­9/CCD/2016/R4755 Dated 25.10.2016 To,  The Chief Secretary/Administrator,  All States/Union Territories (As per list) Sub: Practice by unqualified person in the field of Disability rehabilitation­ reg. Sir,  A   representation   has   been   received   from   President, Orthotics   &   Prosthetic   Association   of   India   (OPAI) regarding practice by unqualified persons in the field of disability (photocopy enclosed).  2. It   is   to   apprise   that   programmes   in   the   field   of Prosthetic   &   Orthotics   such   as   Diploma,   Degree   and Masters are offered by the institution only after approval from   Rehabilitation   Council   of   India   (RCI).   After completion of RCI approved courses, the candidates are registered in Central Rehabilitation Register (CRR) of RCI which authorizes then to practice in the relevant  field President.   OPAI   has   requested   the   Council   to   take appropriate action against ineligible, unqualified persons practising  in   the   field   of  Prosthetic  and  Orthotics  and providing services to persons with disability.  63 3. It is to bring to your kind notice that RCI have been allocated   16   Categories   of   professionals   under   Section 2(n)   of   RCI   Act   1992.   At   present   Council   has   54 programmes from certificate to Doctorate level are being offered   at   RCI   approved   Institutes   throughout   the Country. Some of the programmes such as Prosthetic & Orthotics, Clinical Psychology, Speech & Hearing etc. are required to deliver specialized consultation at grass root level.   If   the   Services   are   delivered   by   untrained   or unqualified individuals to persons with disabilities, it may   in   turn   harm   the   persons   with   disabilities. Hence, there is urgent need to take action against such   persons   so   that   practice   by unprofessional/unqualified persons may be restricted . 4. I   am   enclosing   a   list   of   54   Courses   approved   by Rehabilitation   Council   of   India   being   offered   in   16 categories   with   a   request   to   direct   Secretaries   and Commissioners   of   your   State/Union   Territory   to   take cognizance of such matter under Section 13 & Section 25 of Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992; and Section 61 & Section 62 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 so that practice by unqualified professionals may be curbed.  Yours faithfully, Sd/­ (Dr. Kamlesh Kr. Pandey) Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities Encl: as above” (emphasis supplied) It is also significant to advert to the communication­cum­statutory warning   issued   by   the   Member   Secretary   of   the   Council   on 14.5.2019, making it amply clear that only persons (rehabilitation professionals/special   teachers)   duly   qualified,   recognised   and 64 registered  with  the  Council be allowed to impart  education  and training to CwSN keeping in mind the mandate of Section 13 of the 1992   Act,   breach   whereof   would   entail   in   criminal   action   and imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year.  The said communication reads thus: ­ “ REHABILITATION COUNCIL OF INDIA A Statutory Body under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (Divyangjan) STATUTORY WARNING Practicing without RCI Registration In Govt./Non Govt. Organization and by any Private Practitioner is an offence under section 13(3) of RCI Act No.34 of 1992. It has been observed by the Council that Children with Disabilities (Divyangjan) are being trained/served by   Quacks/Unqualified/Non­registered   Personnel/ Professionals.  If anyone found serving “Persons with Disabilities (Divyangjan)”, without having RCI Certification, shall be prosecuted before the Court of Law under Section  as under: 13(3) of RCI Act, 1992 “Any   person   who   acts   in   contravention   of   any provision of sub­section (2) shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year,   or   with   fine   which   may   extend   to   one thousand rupees, or with both”.  General   Public   is   requested   to   report   such instances   to   the   Council   along   with   documentary 65 evidence by post/fax/email to enable the Council to take appropriate action such as filing of FIR against .  such persons “This Statutory Warning is issued in public interest”.  (Dr. Subodh Kumar) Member Secretary           Dated: 14.05.2019” (emphasis supplied) 44. To effectuate the above objectives of imparting free, inclusive and quality   education  in  the  neighbourhood   school  to  CwSN  in terms of the provisions of the 2009 Act read with the provisions of the 2016 Act, a rehabilitation scheme titled “Deendayal Disabled 18 Rehabilitation   Scheme”   (revised   guidelines   with   effect   from 1.4.2018) has been articulated by the Department of Empowerment for Persons with Disabilities ( Divyangjan ), Ministry of Social Justice 19 and   Empowerment,   Government   of   India .     Taking   note   of   the severity   of   the   situation  revealed   by  the   Census   of   2011   which states that there are about 2.68 crore persons with disabilities in India, constituting 2.21 per cent of the population in the country requiring   special   education,   CwSN   in   particular,   this   scheme 18  for short, “DDRS” 19  for short “DEPwD” 66 mentions the model projects to be undertaken for that purpose.  It is noted thus: ­ “3.3 MODEL PROJECTS 3.3.1 The following are the model projects to be funded under the scheme I. Pre­Schools and Early Intervention and Training II. Special Schools for Children with Disabilities for  a. Intellectual Disability b. Hearing & Speech Disability c. Visual Disability III. Project for children with Cerebral Palsy IV. Rehabilitation of Leprosy Cured Person V. Half Way Home for Psycho­Social Rehabilitation of Treated and Controlled Mentally III persons VI. Home­Based Rehabilitation and Home Management.  VII. Community Based Rehabilitation Programme  VIII. Low Vision Centres Human Resource Development” IX. Part­B of the DDRS deals with the “Model Project Profiles”.   The sub­categories mentioned thereunder are ­ “Project for Pre­School and Early Intervention and Training” followed by “Special Schools for   Children   with   Disabilities”,   and   its   sub­categories,   namely, “Special   School   for   the   Children   with   Intellectual   Disability”; “Special School for the Children with Hearing & Speech Disability”; and “Special Schools for the Children with Visual Disability”.  For 67 each of the projects, the strength of each school has been noted, including   the   pupil­teacher   beneficiary   ratio   range   which   varies with the severity, in cases of children with multiple disabilities.  It recognises   the   fact   that   children   with   multiple   disability   may require maximum and special education and hence, the ratio may be between 4:1 and 6:1. Suffice it to note that the DDRS has delineated the ratio for 45. the   concerned   special   schools   and   it   may   be   commensurately replicated in the general schools corresponding with the number of CwSN admitted or required to be admitted in that school. 46. As   aforesaid,   the   2009   Act   merely   attempts   to   expressly include “child with disability” by inserting Section 2(ee) and Section 3(3)   vide   the   2012   amendment,   but   makes   no   corresponding changes to the “Norms and Standards for a School” specified in the Schedule to the Act.   The Central Government in exercise of the enabling   power   in   Section   20,   by   now,   ought   to   have   provided 68 suitable norms and standards for a general school admitting CwSN for   providing   inclusive,   free,   and   compulsory   education   in   a neighbourhood school, and separately for the special school which also is covered within the expansive definition of schools in Section 2(n) of the 2009 Act. 47.  In any case, until such notification is issued by the Central Government or appropriate Government, as the case may be, all concerned   are   under   bounden   duty   to   give   effect   to   the   norm regarding pupil­teacher ratio specified in the concerned scheme in vogue   including   the   DDRS   and   the   Samagra   Shiksha   —   an 20 integrated Scheme for School Education  issued by Department of School   Education   and   Literacy,   Ministry   of   Human   Resource 21 Development . 48. Chapter   2   of   the   SSS   gives   the   background   in   which   the scheme has been formulated to cover all children from the age of 4 20  for short, “SSS” 21  for short, “DSEL” 69 to 18 years and has a scope across all levels of school education from pre­school to senior secondary on universal basis to ensure the education of all children.  Chapter IV of the scheme deals with the topic – “Inclusion of Children with Special Needs in Education” specifically.   The relevant extract of Chapter IV of the SSS reads thus: ­ “ CHAPTER   4   –   INCLUSION   OF   CHILDREN   WITH SPECIAL NEEDS IN EDUCATION 4.1 Background and Rationale  4.1.1 The NPE, 1986 and POA, 1992 gives the basic policy framework for education, emphasizing on correcting the existing   inequalities,   it   stresses   on   reducing   dropout rates,   improving   learning   achievements   and   expanding access to students who have not had an easy opportunity to   be   a   part   of   the   general   system.   The   NPE,   1986 envisaged some measures for integrating of children with physical   and   mental   handicap   with   the   general community as equal partners, preparing them for their normal growth and development and enabling them to face life with courage and confidence.  4.1.2   India   has   also   been   signatory   to   international declarations   like   the   Salamanca   Statement   and framework for action on special needs education (1994) and Biwako Millennium Framework for Action (2002) and the   UN   Convention   on   the   Rights   of   Persons   with Disabilities,   2006   that   emphasize   the   need   for fundamental educational policy shifts to enable general schools to include children with disabilities. The NCF­ 2005   recommends   making   the   curriculum   flexible   and appropriate   to   accommodate   the   diversity   of   school children including those with disabilities in both cognitive and non­cognitive areas.  70 4.1.3   The   Centrally   Sponsored   Scheme   of   Integrated Education for the Disabled Children was introduced in 1992 with a view to providing educational opportunities for   children   with   disabilities   in   general   schools,   to facilitate their retention in the schools system. It provided for   facilities   to   students   with   disabilities   including expenses on books and stationery, expenses on uniforms, transport allowance, reader allowance, escort allowance, hostel accommodation and actual cost for equipments. The scheme also supported the appointment of special teachers,   provision   for   resource   rooms   and   removal  of architectural barriers in schools.  4.1.4 The Centrally Sponsored Scheme of SSA of 2001 had set time­bound targets for the achievements of UEE. With “zero rejection’ as its cornerstone, the programme provided   support   for   the   inclusion   of   children   with disabilities in general schools at the elementary level. The SSA norms were further strengthened by the RTE Act, 2009 which talks about free and compulsory elementary education to children without any discrimination on the basis of caste, gender, disability etc.  4.1.5 While the RTE Act mandates inclusion of CWSN, some   may   be   unable   to   attend   school   despite   specific interventions   designed   for   their   education.   The amendment of RTE Act (in August 2012) has included CWSN   in   the   definition   of   disadvantaged   groups.   It includes children with severe ­ multiple disabilities with the right to opt for Home Based Education (HBE), thus creating an enabling environment for all children.  4.1.7 As SSA supported inclusion of children with special needs at the elementary education level, a need was felt for a scheme for the disabled children at secondary stage. The IEDSS scheme was, therefore implemented to enable all children and young persons with disabilities to have access   to   secondary   education   and   to   improve   their enrolment,   retention   and   achievement   in   the   general education system. Under the scheme every school was proposed   to   be   made   disabled­friendly.   The   Centrally Sponsored IEDSS Scheme aimed at enabling all students with   disabilities   completing   eight   years   of   elementary schooling   an   opportunity   to   complete   four   years   of secondary schooling (classes IX to XII) in an inclusive and enabling   environment   and   provided   educational 71 opportunities and facilities to students with disabilities in the   general   education   system   at   the   secondary   level (classes IX to XII). 4.1.8  Samagra Shiksha aims to look at education of all children including  CWSN  in a  continuum from pre­ school to class XII. The scheme will cover all children with special needs with one or more disabilities as mentioned in the schedule of disabilities of the Right of   the   Persons   with   Disabilities   (RPwD)   Act,   2016 studying in Government, Government­aided and local body schools . 4.1.9  The scheme stresses on working in convergence with all the line Departments/ Ministries and intends to provide relevant holistic support for effective and appropriate services for education of CWSN . 4.1.10  The objectives of the scheme  are:  To enable all children and young persons with disabilities to have access to inclusive education and   improve   their   enrolment,   retention   and achievement in the general education system.  Identification of children with disabilities at the school   level   and   assessment   of   her/his educational needs.  Provision   of   aids   and   appliance   and   assistive devices, to the children with special needs as per requirement.  Removal of architectural barriers in schools so that   students   with   disability   have   access   to classrooms, laboratories, libraries and toilets in the school.  Supplying   appropriate   teaching   learning materials,   medical   facilities,   vocational training   support,   guidance   and   counselling services and therapeutic services to children with special needs as per their requirement in convergence with line departments .  General   school   teachers   will   be   sensitized and   trained   to   teach   and   involve   children with special needs in the general classroom. 72 For   existing   special   educators,   capacity building programmes will be undertaken.  CWSN   will   have   access   to   support   services through special educators, establishment of resource   rooms,   vocational   education, therapeutic services and counselling . THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, 2016 CHAPTER III EDUCATION 22 16. 23 17. 4.2 Target Group 4.2.1 The scheme will cover all children from pre­school to senior secondary stage studying in Government, local body and Government­aided schools, with one or more disabilities as defined under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (2016) namely: 1. Blindness 2. Low­vision 3. Leprosy Cured persons 4. Hearing Impairment (deaf and hard of hearing) 5. Locomotor Disability 6. Dwarfism 7. Intellectual Disability 8. Mental Illness 9. Autism Spectrum Disorder 10. Cerebral Palsy 11. Muscular Dystrophy 22  Section 16 reproduced in paragraph 41 above. 23  Section 17 reproduced in paragraph 41 above 73 12. Chronic Neurological conditions 13. Specific Learning Disabilities 14. Multiple Sclerosis 15. Speech and Language disability 16. Thalassemia 17. Hemophilia 18. Sickle Cell disease 19. Multiple Disabilities including deaf blindness 20. Acid Attack victim 21. Parkinson's disease 4.2.2   Girls with disabilities will receive special focus and efforts would be made under the scheme to help them   gain   access   to   schools,   as   also   to   provide motivation   and   guidance   for   developing   their potential . 4.2.3   All   the   enrolled   CWSN   will   be   covered   through UDISE/SDMIS   and   will   eventually   be   linked   with Aadhaar,   ultimately   facilitating   the   State/UT   to   track CWSN of both systems i.e. those that are in school and those with Home based. The UDISE will have the relevant details of children. Further an extensive database will be developed which will cover all the particulars of children including the type of disability, degree of severity, medical needs, emergency contacts and all other relevant details that   will  help   the   School   management   to  cater   to   the needs of the CWSN. 4.3  Components of the Scheme The Scheme will include assistance for two kinds of components: 4.3.1  Student oriented component The   student   oriented   component   may   be   utilized   for specified items like:­ (i)  Identification  and assessment   of  children with disabilities. 74 (ii) Provision of aids and appliances, medical services, diagnostic services etc.  (iii)  Access to and development of teaching learning material as per requirement etc . (iv) Provision of facilities like transport/escort facilities for children with severe disabilities, hostel facilities, scholarship, assistive devices, support staff (readers, amanuensis) etc. (v) Provision of large print text book, Braille books and uniform allowance. (vi) Stipend for Girl Students @ Rs. 200 per month   for   10   months   to   encourage   their participation in the school system for all girls with disabilities studying in Classes­I to XII. (vii) The use of ICT to increase access to a vast amount   of   information   not   otherwise available. (viii)   Awareness   and   motivation   camps   for increasing enrolment and retention. (ix)   Provision   of   Home   Based   Education   for children with severe multiple disabilities with a   view   to   mainstream   them   in   the   general education system. 4.3.2  Resource support For providing resource support to CWSN, the existing human resource appointed under SSA and RMSA will be rationalized and the remaining vacancies may be filled   through   fresh   appointment   as   per   the   norms provided at Annexure­III. All special educators should be   registered   with   Rehabilitation   Council   of   India (RCI).   These   educators   should   mandatorily   be available   for   all   CWSN   including   the   children   with high   support   needs   as   well.   The   educators   may   be posted   at   the   block   or   cluster   level   or   as   per   the requirement and can operate in an itinerant mode, 75 covering   a   group   of   schools   where   children   with special   needs   are   enrolled   so   that   each   child   with special need is adequately covered. 4.4  Key   areas   of   the   Inclusive   Education Component Education for CWSN involves multiple aspects above and beyond   the   financial   support.   Many   areas   have   to   be looked   upon   manifestly   that   will   ensure   proper implementation and effective inclusion. The highlights of the components are discussed below.  Education of teachers and other stakehold ers Social Access to Key Curricular access CWSN Are as Building synergy Research & Developme with special schools nt 4.5  Education of teachers and other stakeholders Intensive   teacher   education   programme   will   be undertaken   to   sensitize   and   build   capacity   of   the regular   teachers   and   resource   teachers   on   meeting learning   needs   of   all   teachers   to   provide   quality education   to   CWSN   and   improve   their   learning outcomes. This teacher education programme will be recurrent at block/cluster levels and integrated with the   on­going   in­service   teacher   education/training schedules  in   DIETs  and   other  Institutions.   Teacher education   modules   at   SCERT,   DIET   and   BRC   level should include suitable components on education of 76 children with special needs. Training of educational administrators including headmasters, all other staff & relevant personnel of school education should be regularly organized. Special focus should be given on mechanisms for safety and security of children with special needs . 4.6  Curricular access The curriculum must be inclusive as envisioned in NCF­ 2005.   It   should   ensure   that   the   same   curriculum   be followed for children with and without special needs, but with   adaptations/modifications   if   required   in   learning content,  teaching   learning   processes,  teaching  learning materials/aids and in evaluation, etc. Provision will be made to provide text books and curriculum in accessible formats to CWSN.  Exam reforms need to be made by Central and State Boards for conducting exams of CWSN. Guidelines issued in this regard by the Department of Disability Affairs are enclosed at  Annexure­IV . The modifications may be made disability specific, (for  example, oral exam for  children with specific learning disability, extra time for children with visual impairment, low vision and cerebral palsy etc). A regular audit of existing textbooks from CWSN lens will be a priority for an apt curriculum. 4.7  Individualized Educational Plan (IEP)  IEP will be undertaken in context of the RPwD Act, as “Individualized Support” (as mentioned in Chapter 3 of RPwD Act, 2016). Its implementation will be monitored from time to time.   The Individualized Support should review   the   effectiveness   of   various   strategies   and support services used by children with special needs periodically, after developing indicators . 4.8  Building synergy with special schools  77 4.8.1  In case of non­availability of resources required for   education   of   children   with   special   needs   and training of teachers teaching CWSN, assistance from special schools may be taken. These special schools can work as resource centers for providing resources like development of curricular materials and  TLMs, providing support services to CWSN and training of teachers etc . 4.8.2   In some cases, special schools can also impart special   training   to   CWSN   for   facilitating   age appropriate   placement   in   the   classroom   for   a specified period of time . NGOs working on education of children with chronic health impairments like leukemia, heart diseases and cancer etc, may also provide resource support for pertinent care and health related needs and capacity building of teachers. 4.9  Research and Development The   Integrated   Scheme   will   encourage   research   and development activities in all areas of education of children with special needs including action research, researches to   improve   learning   of   CWSN,   especially   focusing   on children   with   high   support   needs   (Thalassemia, Hemophilia, Sickle Cell disease and Chronic neurological conditions   etc),   eventually   leading   to   concrete   learning outcomes. For this, convergence with different Ministries like   Ministry   of   Health   and   Family   Welfare,   MoWCD, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Ministry of Sports   and   Youth   Affairs,   private   organizations   with Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) funds etc. 4.10  Social Access to CWSN Ensuring social access to CWSN is a greater challenge as compared to providing physical access as it requires an in­depth understanding of the various educational needs of CWSN. A very important dimension of social access is discrimination.   CWSN   are   subjected   to   many   forms   of discrimination. Teachers and peers have a very important 78 role to play in this context. Social access could include the following: i.    Parental training ii.   Peer sensitization iii.  Awareness   building   of   different   stakeholders across all levels iv.  Special emphasis will be given to education of girls with disability 4.11  Monitoring & Evaluation: On­going monitoring and evaluation should be carried out to   refine   the   programme   from   time   to   time.   For   this, appropriate monitoring mechanisms and tools are to be devised at every level and field tested at regular intervals. ANNEXURE­III  GUIDELINES FOR APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL EDUCATORS  1 .   Minimum Educational Qualifications for becoming an   Educator   for   Classes   preschool­V   (Pre   School   to Primary Stage) (a)  Classes   I­V:   Senior   Secondary   (or   its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 2­ year   Diploma   in   Education   (Special Education). (b)  Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose. 2. Minimum Qualifications for becoming an Educator for Classes VI­VIII (Elementary stage) 79 (a)  Graduation with at least 50% marks and 1­ 24 year B.Ed. (Special Education) Or Graduation with at least 50% marks and 2­ 25 year B. Ed. (Special Education) (b)  Pass in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose. 3. Minimum Qualifications for becoming an Educator for Classes IX­XII: (Secondary stage) • All Special Educators must be registered with the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI). • Educators with Qualifications in single disability area   will   be   encouraged   to   specialize   in   other disability  areas  to  take   care  of  a   wide  range  of diversities in a general school. • Relaxation up to 5% in the qualifying marks in the   minimum   Educational   Qualification   for eligibility   shall   be   allowed   to   the   candidates belonging   to   reserved   categories,   such   as SC/ST/OBC/Differently abled. • Training to be undergone: A person with D. Ed. (Special Education) or B. Ed. (Special Education) qualification shall undergo, after appointment an NCTE recognized 6­month Special Programme in Elementary Education.” (emphasis supplied) 24  For candidates who have graduated in B.Ed. (Special Education) in/before 2015­16 i.e. the  1 year course. 25  For candidates who have graduated in B.Ed. (Special Education) after 2015­16 i.e. the 2 years course (in regular or distance mode). 80 49. Besides   the   above­mentioned   scheme,   the   Ministry   of Education   (formerly,   the   Ministry   of   Human   Resource Development),   Government   of   India   has   formulated   National Education Policy, 2020 dealing with a gamut of aspects including the strengthening of the dispensation to deliver free, inclusive and quality education in the neighbourhood school to all between the age group of 4 to 18 years.   While referring to the teaching for children with disabilities/ Divyang  in the middle and secondary level school, it is noted as follows: ­ “ Special educators 5.21.   There is an urgent need for additional special educators for certain areas of school education. Some examples   of   such   specialist   requirements   include subject   teaching   for   children   with disabilities/ Divyang   children   at   the   Middle   and Secondary school level, including teaching for specific learning disabilities. Such teachers would require not only subject­teaching knowledge and understanding of subject­related   aims   of   education,   but   also   the relevant   skills   for   understanding   of   special requirements of children. Therefore, such areas could be developed as secondary specializations for subject teachers or generalist teachers, during or after pre­ service   teacher   preparation .   They   will   be   offered   as certificate courses, in the pre­service as well as in­service mode, either full time or as part­time/blended courses ­ again,   necessarily,   at   multidisciplinary   colleges   or universities.   Greater synergy will be enabled between the   course   curriculum   of   NCTE   and   RCI   to   ensure 81 adequate   availability   of   qualified   special   educators .” who can handle subject teaching as well (emphasis supplied) Another relevant portion of this Scheme is clause 7, dealing with efficient   resourcing   and   effective   governance   through   school complexes/clusters.  The relevant portion thereof reads thus: ­ “ 7.   Efficient   Resourcing   and   Effective   Governance through School Complexes/Clusters  7.1. While the establishment of primary schools in every habitation   across   the   country­driven   by   the   Sarva Shiksha   Abhiyan   (SSA),   now   subsumed   under   the Samagra   Shiksha   Scheme   and   other   important   efforts across the States ­ has helped to ensure near­universal access   to   primary   schools,   it   has   also   led   to   the development of numerous very small schools. According to U­DISE 2016–17 data, nearly 28% of India’s public primary   schools   and   14.8%   of   India’s   upper   primary schools have less than 30 students. The average number of students per grade in the elementary schooling system (primary and upper primary, i.e., Grades 1–8) is about 14, with a notable proportion having below 6; during the year 2016–17, there were 1,08,017 single­teacher schools, the majority of them (85743) being primary schools serving Grades 1–5.  7.2.   These   small   school   sizes   have   rendered   it economically   suboptimal   and   operationally   complex   to run good schools, in terms of deployment of teachers as well   as   the   provision   of   critical   physical   resources. Teachers often teach multiple grades at a time, and teach multiple subjects, including subjects in which they may have no prior background; key areas such as music, arts, and sports are too often simply not taught; and physical 82 resources, such as lab and sports equipment and library books, are simply not available across schools.  7.3. The isolation of small schools also has a negative effect   on   education   and   the   teaching­learning   process. Teachers function best in communities and teams, and so do   students.   Small   schools   also   present   a   systemic challenge   for   governance   and   management.   The geographical   dispersion,   challenging   access   conditions, and the very large numbers of schools make it difficult to reach all schools equally. Administrative structures have not  been aligned  with the increases  in  the  number  of school   or   with   the   unified   structure   of   the   Samagra Shiksha Scheme. 7.4.   Although  consolidation  of  schools is  an  option that is often discussed, it must be carried out very judiciously, and only when it is ensured that there is no impact on access . Such measures are nevertheless likely to result only in limited consolidation, and would not solve the overall structural problem and challenges presented by the large numbers of small schools.  7.5.   These challenges will, by 2025, be addressed by State/UT   governments   by   adopting   innovative mechanisms   to   group   or   rationalize   schools.   The objective behind this intervention would be to ensure that   every   school   has:   (a)   adequate   number   of counsellors/trained   social   workers   and   teachers (shared   or   otherwise)   for   teaching   all   subjects including   art,   music   science,   sports,   languages, vocational   subjects,   etc;   (b)   adequate   resources (shared or otherwise), such as a library, science labs, computer   labs,   skill   labs,   playgrounds,   sports equipment   and   facilities,   etc.;   (c)   a   sense   of community   is   built   to   overcome   the   isolation   of teachers,   students,   and   schools,   through   joint professional   development   programmes,   sharing   of teaching­learning content, joint content development, holding   joint   activities   such   as   art   and   science exhibitions, sports meets, quizzes and debates, and fairs; (d) cooperation and support across schools for the   education   of   children   with   disabilities;   and   (e) improved   governance   of   the   schooling   system   by 83 devolving all finer decisions, to Principals, teachers, and other stakeholders within each group of schools and   treating   such   a   group   of   schools,   which   range from  the   foundational   stage   through   the   secondary stage, as an integrated semi­autonomous unit .  7.6.   One possible mechanism for accomplishing the above   would   be   the   establishment   of   a   grouping structure called the school complex, consisting of one secondary   school   together   with   all   other   schools offering lower grades in its neighbourhood including Anganwadis, in a radius of five to ten kilometers . This suggestion was first made by the Education Commission (1964–66)   but   was   left   unimplemented.   This   Policy strongly   endorses   the   idea   of   the   school complex/cluster, wherever possible. The aim of the school   complex/cluster   will   be   greater   resource efficiency   and   more   effective   functioning, coordination,   leadership,   governance,   and .  management of schools in the cluster 7.7.   The establishment of school complexes/clusters and   the  sharing   of  resources  across  complexes will have a number of other benefits as a consequence, such   as   improved   support   for   children   with disabilities,   more   topic­centred   clubs   and academic/sports/arts/crafts   events   across   school complexes,   better   incorporation   of   art,   music, language, vocational subjects, physical education, and other subjects in the classroom through the sharing of teachers in these subjects including use of ICT tools to   conduct   virtual   classes,   better   student   support, enrolment, attendance, and performance through the sharing of social workers and counsellors, and School Complex   Management   Committees   (rather   than simply   School   Management   Committees)   for   more robust   and   improved   governance,   monitoring, oversight,   innovations,   and   initiatives   by   local stakeholders.   Building   such   larger   communities   of schools,   school   leaders,   teachers,   students, supporting   staff,   parents,   and   local   citizens   would 84 energize and empower the schooling system, and in a .” resource­efficient manner (emphasis supplied) 50. Be it noted that the ratio of pupil­teacher has been mentioned in the stated schemes besides the norms and standards specified in the Schedule to the 2009 Act.  Indeed, the Schedule to the 2009 Act makes no distinction between general schools and special schools, but the norms and standards specified for general schools cannot be replicated for special schools, which are governed by special laws in respect of rights of persons with disabilities and the schemes framed therefor.  The 2009 Act does clarify the position that the Act applies to all schools including the schools admitting child with disability  as defined  in Section 2(ee) and   gives equal  and  same rights   to   such   children   to   pursue   free,   quality   and   compulsory education in the neighbourhood school.  It further provides children with multiple disabilities and children with severe disabilities may opt   for   even   home­based   education.     The   fact   remains   that   for meaningful   and   effective   imparting   of   education   and   training   to CwSN, different norms and standards ought to be followed and for 85 that purpose, the concerned schools are obliged to create posts of rehabilitation   professionals/special   education   teachers commensurate to number of (CwSN) students in the given school. 51. Somewhat similar issue was pursued before the Court of State Commissioner   for   Persons   with   Disabilities,   National   Capital Territory of Delhi in the case of   Ms. Reshma Parveen vs. The 26 Director, Directorate of Education .  The said Forum established under the 2016 Act was called upon to consider the following two questions: ­ “(i) What  should be the basis for  creating  the posts of Special  Education  Teachers  at  different   levels  namely   i.e. Pre­school/   Nursery   (For   children   in   the   age   group   4­6 years);   Primary   and   Upper   Primary   (For   Classes   I­VIII); Secondary/High   School   (For   Classes   IX­X)   and   Senior Secondary/Intermediate (For Classes XIXII). RCI was once again   advised   to   facilitate   and   suggest,   preferably   in consultation   with   RCI ‟ s   concerned   expert   committee members,   the criteria for determining the category and number of Special Education Teachers at different levels before the next date of hearing. DoE and other respondents could also submit their suggestion.  (ii) The   strategy   for   deployment   of   Special   Education Teachers   of   different   categories   and   at   different   levels   as mentioned in sub para (i) above, so that the children with various   disabilities   get   the   services   of   Special   Education 26  Decided on 31.12.2019 in Case No. 824/1014/2019/04/9072­84 86 Teachers   in   whichever   school   they   may   be   as   it   was contended that it may not be possible to create such posts and appoint Special Education Teachers of different specialty in every school.” (emphasis supplied) After analyzing the relevant provisions and the schemes, the State Commissioner made following recommendations: ­ “62. After going through the submissions of the parties, the views of the experts and based on my interactions with   the   parents   of   children   with   disabilities   and   my experience   while   dealing   with   their   complaints,   the following recommendations are made:  i) As   an   immediate   measure,   Director,   DoE; Commissioner, North DMC; Commissioner, SDMC; Commissioner,   EDMC;   Chairman,   New   Delhi Municipal   Council   and   CEO,   Cantonment   Board should   create   at   least   two   posts   of   Special Education   Teachers  per  school   an   appropriate . mix of various specialisations   ii) Respondents   no.   1   to   6   should   make provision for appointment of Special Education Teachers   in   Autism   Spectrum   Disorder, Intellectual Disability, Learning Disability, Deaf­ Blind,  Visual  Impairment,  Hearing  Impairment and   Cerebral   Palsy   which   are   RCI   approved Teacher Training Courses .  iii) Since   the   number   of   students   with different   disabilities   in   schools   is   dynamic, provision   of   Special   Education   Teachers   per school would not have any rationale to continue for   long   and   hence   will   not   be   a   reasonable criterion.   The   number   of   Special   Education 87 Teachers   in   a   particular   disability   should   be determined   based   on   the   generally   accepted pupil   teacher   ratio   of   1:8   for   children   with Cerebral Palsy, visual impairment and hearing impairment,   1:5   for   children   with   intellectual disability, ASD and Specific learning disabilities; and 1:2 for Deaf­Blind and a combination of two or   more   of   the   seven   disabilities   mentioned .  above iv) Respondent no.1 to 6 within one month of receipt of this order, should obtain the number of children   with   different   disabilities   in   the   schools under their respective jurisdictions and determine the number of Special Education Teachers required in different disciplines based on the criteria at (ii) above. They should also make an estimation of out of   school   children   with   disabilities,   which   was 28.07% for all India and 7.28% for Delhi as per National   Sample   Survey:   Estimation   of   Out­of­ School Children in the Age 6­13: Social & Rural Research Institute & Technical Support Group for SSA,   Ed   CIL,   2014   and   54%   of   children   with multiple   disabilities   (CwMDs)   never   attended   an educational institution as per Census 2011.  v) After determining the number of Special Educators   for   preprimary   level/primary   level, upper   primary   level,   secondary   and   Sr. Secondary level, respondents no. 1 to 6 should initiate action to create or convert the existing posts   of   general   teachers   into   the   required number   of   Special   Education   Teachers   of   the appropriate   specialities   at   different   levels including   at   primary   level.   The   minimum requirement   of   RCI   approved   qualification should be as prescribed by RCI. This should be done within 3 months from the date of receipt of   this   order.   It   should   be   noted   that   there cannot be different criteria for the schools of DoE and that of the Corporations .  88 vi) Respondents no. 1 to 6 should either set up resource centre in each school or for a cluster of closely located schools, not beyond a radius of 2­3 KMs   where   all   teaching,   learning material/resources including the Special Education Teachers of different speciality should be available for deployment in the schools as per need to ensure that   every   child   with   any   disability   is   ensured quality   education   on   equal   basis   with   others. Equality as well as equity must be ensured.  vii) The   conditions   of   service   and   the Recruitment   Rules   for   Special   Education Teachers should also clearly prescribe that they may be required to teach not only children with disabilities but also children without disability in mainstream schools so that full utilization of their   services   is   ensured.   NCTE   should   issue necessary notification about their eligibility to teach   children   without   disabilities   at appropriate   level   as   per   their   qualification within three months from the date of receipt of this order. It should also be ensured that Special Education   Teachers   are   treated   at   par   with mainstream   teachers   in   terms   of   service conditions such as pay, etc .  viii) It   is   a   matter   of   concern   that   NCTE (respondent no. 8) neither responded nor submitted any comments/advice with regard to the eligibility of Special Education Teachers at secondary/ higher secondary level.   NCTE should incorporate in the curriculum   of   teacher   training   programmes, mandatory   papers   on   handling   children   with disabilities,  basic sign language and Braille, if not   already   done,   as   otherwise   children   with disabilities   will   be   deprived   of   their   right   to quality   education   on   equal   basis   with   other children which is a mandate of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 as well as RTE Act, 2009 as amended in 2012 .  89 ix) All in­service mainstream teachers at all levels,   i.e.   Pre­Primary,   Upper   Primary, Secondary   and   Sr.   Secondary   Level   must   be exposed to the needs of children with different disabilities   by   mandatory   training   of   a   given duration. DoE should do it in consultation with RCI   within   three   months   from   the   date   of receipt of this order and respondent No1 to 6 should   plan   the   training   of   their   respective mainstream teachers in a time bound manner and complete the training within a reasonable period of time.  x) NCERT   should   include   a   compulsory module on teaching of children with disabilities ’ in   its   online   digital   platform   ‘Swayam   for training of In­service teachers . DoE,   Govt.   NCT   of   Delhi   should   develop xi) guidelines for the inclusive education and inclusive schools in NCT of Delhi in Govt. as well as Private Schools   in   consultation   with   the   experts   in   the field,   the   parents   of   children   with   disabilities belonging to different strata of the Society and put in   place   a   robust   mechanism   to   ensure   its implementation by all concerned.  xii) Ministry of HRD, Govt of India should also issue model guidelines and the quality indicators for   inclusive   education   and   inclusive   schools   for adoption/adaptation as per local conditions at the earliest.” (emphasis supplied) As   a   stopgap   arrangement   until   the   competent   authority 52. formulates a comprehensive action plan including to specify the norms   and   standards   regarding   pupil­teacher   ratio   to   be 90 maintained by the concerned schools imparting education to CwSN, we are persuaded to adopt the pupil­teacher ratio ascertained in this decision as 8:1 for children with cerebral palsy; 5:1 for children with intellectual disability, ASD and specific learning disabilities; and 2:1 for deaf­blind and a combination of two or more of the seven disabilities mentioned in the recommendation No. (iii) noted above.   Indeed, the teachers to be so appointed need to be duly qualified,   recognized   and   registered   with  the   Council   in  light  of Section 13 of the 1992 Act. 53. As   regards   the   appointment   of   special   educators/special teachers/rehabilitation   professionals   on   itinerant   basis   under clause 4.3.2 of the SSS, the same may not appear to be in strict conformity   with   Section   25(2)   of   the   2009   Act.     However,   such teachers are not to be posted in a school as such, but are to render their services in a cluster of schools, which is permissible in the context of the special teachers under the 1992 Act and the 1999 Act.  The mandate is that CwSN must be educated and trained only by   special   teachers   being   rehabilitation   professionals,   duly 91 recognized and registered by the Council under the 1992 Act.  The operation   of   the   two   Acts   being   Union   enactments,   need   to   be harmonized.   Further, the schemes formulated for strengthening the mechanism to espouse the cause of CwSN under the special legislations for persons with disabilities must prevail to the extent of special   arrangements   for   imparting   education   to   them   and   not constricted   by   the   general   enactment   of   2009   (the   2009   Act) regarding   right   of   children   to   free   and   compulsory   education. Indeed, a policy or a scheme cannot override the statutory mandate predicated in an Act made by the Parliament.  However, schemes for special schools and in respect of the CwSN, in particular, make special provisions and in reference to the legislation such as the 1992 Act and the 1999 Act including the 2016 Act.  Those schemes would prevail unless they are found to be in conflict with any of the express provisions of that very special legislation(s).  However, the same cannot be assailed as being in conflict with the 2009 Act, which is a general law governing the norms and standards to be observed by the schools which indeed may include a special school. 92 54. As   a   matter   of   fact,   the   2009   Act   recognizes   the   special treatment needed for the child with disability/CwSN by insertion of Section 2(ee) and Section 3(3) in the Act, which not only recognize the right of CwSN to get free, quality and compulsory education in neighbourhood   school   till   the   completion   of   their   elementary education, but also the right to opt for home­based education if the child is inflicted with multiple disabilities or severe disability, as the case may be.  What is absent in the 2009 Act is the modification of the   norms   and   standards   originally   specified   in   Schedule   I applicable   for   general   schools.     Though,   later   in   2012,   the Parliament realized the need to amend the 2009 Act to expressly include the CwSN, it should have also made corresponding changes in Schedule I to provide for suitable norms for CwSN, by providing distinct dispensation for the general schools admitting CwSN and the special schools catering only to CwSN.  That could still be done by the appropriate authority by amending the Schedule in exercise of power under Section 20 and enabling provisions in the 2009 Act. 93 55. Indisputably, the schools registered as special schools are also governed by special legislation and the schemes framed therefor and would come under the DEPwD, whereas the general schools come under the Ministry of Education and are governed by the 2009 Act including by the SSS. 56. As of today, there is a dearth of rehabilitation professionals or special   teachers   recognized   and   registered   by   the   Council,   who alone can impart education and training to handicap person/CwSN. This disparity will have to be addressed by the National Council of 27 Teachers   Education   coming   under   a   different   department   i.e., DSEL.     It   is   for   the   NCTE   to   evolve   holistic   mechanism   in collaboration with the Council to enhance the number of special teachers to overcome the deficit.   As aforesaid, the persons with disabilities   in   India   constitute   over   2.21   per   cent   of   the   total population of the country, as per the census figures of 2011.   At present, there are only 1,20,781 special educators registered with the Council.   As per the available data with the Unified District 27  for short, “NCTE” 94 Information System for Education, there are 22.5 lakh CwSN in the country.     Further,   only   4.33   lakh   general   teachers   have   been trained to teach CwSN in addition to teaching general children and only 28,535 special teachers are available for children with special needs/CwSN.  These figures are stated in the affidavit of Mr. Anil Gairola,   Under   Secretary   in   the   Ministry   of   Education,   dated 12.7.2021.   The State­wise number of special educators has been furnished at page 190 of the written note filed on behalf of the Union of India. The same reads thus: ­

95

57. In view of the above, a multipronged approach needs to be adopted by the concerned Authorities with immediate effect,   inter alia,  as follows: ­ A. The Central Government must forthwith notify the norms   and   standards   of   pupil­teacher   ratio   for special schools and also separate norms for special teachers   who   alone   can   impart   education   and training to CwSN in the general schools; and until such time, as a stopgap arrangement adopt the recommendations   made   by   the   State Commissioner, NCT of Delhi in the case of   Ms. 96 28 Reshma  Parveen   reproduced  in  paragraph  51 above; B. To create commensurate permanent posts as per the   just   ratio   to   be   specified   by   the   competent authority   for   the   rehabilitation professionals/special   teachers   who   can   cater   to the needs of CwSN;  C. To initiate appointment process to fill­in vacancies for   the   posts   so   created   for   rehabilitation professionals/special teachers for being appointed on regular basis.   The same shall be completed within six months from the date of this order or before the commencement of academic year 2022­ 2023, whichever is earlier; D. To   overcome   the   shortage   of   resource   persons (rehabilitation   professionals/special   trained teachers),   the  training  schools/institutions   must take steps to augment the number whilst ensuring that the norms and standards specified under the governing laws and regulations including that of the   Council   for   grant   of   recognition   and registration are fulfilled; E. Until   sufficient   number   of   special   teachers becomes available for general schools and special 28  supra at Footnote No. 28 97 schools,   the   services   of   special   trained   teachers can be availed as itinerant teachers as per the SSS within   the   school   block   (cluster   schools)   to optimize the resource persons and as a stopgap arrangement; F. The other teachers and staff in the general schools be   given   compulsory   training   and   sensitized   to handle   the   CwSN   in   the   general   schools,   if admitted; and G. The authorities may also explore the possibility of merging   unviable   special   schools   with   relatively viable special schools in the neighbourhood, so as to entail in consolidation of assets and resources for better delivery to the requirements of CwSN. 58. For the nature of observations made and directions issued, it is not limited to the States of Uttar Pradesh and Punjab, but will operate across the country (all States and Union Territories). 59. With   a   view   to   ensure   that   the   directions   are   effectively complied with, we direct the State Commissioners appointed under Section   79   of   the   2016   Act   in   the   concerned   States/Union 98 Territories   to   forthwith   initiate   suo   motu   enquiries   regarding compliance   and   then   make   recommendation   to   the   appropriate authority   (of   the   concerned   State/Union   Territory),   as   may   be necessary,   so   that   the   authority   will   be   obliged   to   submit compliance report to the State Commissioner within three months from the date of receipt of recommendation, as mandated under Section 81 of the 2016 Act.   The respective State Commissioners may then submit report in respect of compliances/non­compliances within their concerned State/Union Territory to this Court by end of February, 2022, so that further directions, as may be necessary, can be issued by this Court State/Union Territory wise. 60. We are making it amply clear that we are not deciding on the working conditions of the special teachers and the class of persons represented by the petitioners before this Court. 61. Further, we deem it appropriate to presently issue directions to the State Commissioner(s) (which includes the States of Uttar 99 Pradesh and Punjab), who would be in a better position to ensure that   corrective   and   remedial   steps   are   taken   by   the   concerned State/Union Territory within the timeline specified in this order.  If that happens, the relief claimed by the petitioners before this Court would   substantially   stand   redressed.     However,   we   may   not   be understood to have expressed any final opinion in that regard. 62. The matter be notified in the first week of March, 2022 on a non­miscellaneous   day,   for   consideration  of   the   reports  received from   the   concerned   State   Commissioners.     The   Registry   shall provide copy of the reports received by it from time to time to the learned  Amicus Curiae  Mr. Rishi Malhotra, Advocate­on­Record who may prepare appropriate chart/table to be presented to the Court on the next date of hearing. 63. Copy of this order be forwarded to the State Commissioner of all   the   States/Union   Territories   through   email   forthwith,   for information   and   necessary   action.     Copy   of   this   order   be   also forwarded   to   the   Chief   Secretary/Lieutenant 100 Governor/Administrator   of   the   States/Union   Territories   through email, for information and necessary action. 64. We   also   issue   notice   to   the   Secretary   of   Department   of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (DEPwD) – Ministry of Social   Justice   and   Empowerment;   and   Secretary,   Ministry   of Education, both Government of India, New Delhi, returnable in the first week of March 2022.  They are also expected to take necessary corrective and remedial steps in light of this decision, to the extent applicable,   including   to   issue   directions   to   all   concerned   for reporting compliance. ………………………………J.        (A.M. Khanwilkar) ………………………………J. (Dinesh Maheshwari) ………………………………J.        (C.T. Ravikumar) New Delhi; October 28, 2021.