"Accessibility is not a matter of charity but a facet of Article 21." Discuss in light of the Rajive Raturi judgment (2024).

Accessibility means removing barriers to buildings, transport, information and digital services. For a long time India treated it as welfare. In Rajive Raturi v. Union of India (2024 INSC 858), the Supreme Court made it an enforceable right, rooted in the dignity guaranteed by Article 21 [1].

From charity to rights

• Social model: The Court held that society's barriers create disability. The cause does not lie in the individual [1].
• Ex-ante duty: The State must provide access before anyone asks for it. It is a duty, not a favour granted on request [1].
• Treaty basis: Article 9 of the UNCRPD covers buildings, transport, ICT and e-services [3]. The RPwD Act, 2016 gives effect to it [2].

Article 21 in the Raturi judgment

• Dignity: A dignified life requires conditions that let persons with disabilities enjoy the same freedoms as others. The Court read this together with Art. 14 (equal access) and Art. 19 (movement, expression) to secure substantive equality [1].
• Foundational right: Accessibility is the gateway to the other rights in Part III [1].
• Rule 15(1) ultra vires: Guidelines such as the Harmonised Guidelines 2021 gave an "aspirational ceiling" but no "non-negotiable floor" [1].
• Remedy: The Centre must frame mandatory rules under Section 40 within three months, with NALSAR-CDS involved. Penalties under Sections 44, 45, 46 and 89 apply, including withholding completion certificates and fines [1].
• Two-pronged approach: Retrofit existing infrastructure, and build universal design into new projects from the start. This includes screen readers and accessible digital interfaces [1].

Challenges in implementation

• Progressive realisation: Some aspects take time, but the Court held that the minimum floor cannot be deferred [1].
• Fragmented standards: Ministries' guidelines conflict. For example, HG 2021 and the civil aviation standards set different requirements for accessible toilets [1].
• Cost: Retrofitting is more complex and expensive than designing inclusively from the outset [1].
• Compliance lag: The Union had to report compliance by 7 March 2025 [1]. Notifying and enforcing the rules on time is now the real test.

Raturi completes the shift from benevolence to entitlement by making accessibility a judicially enforceable right under Article 21. The way forward is to:

• notify binding, harmonised standards;
• extend them to digital and AI-driven public services;
• consult organisations of persons with disabilities continuously, as the Court directed [1].

This would bring India's constitutional promise of dignity in line with the UNCRPD's goal of full and equal participation.