On November 12, the Supreme Court ruled on a writ petition filed by Arushi Singha person with a reference disability, who had approach the Court over the humiliation she faced at the Calcutta airport, where security personnel allegedly asked her to stand up. The Court held that the guidelines suggested by the Union government for dignified treatment of persons with disabilities at the airport will be considered mandatory from now on and will also extend to elderly and injured passengers in need of wheelchair assistance.

Singh, a graduate of the National Law Institute of Bhopal and an LL.M. from the National University of Singapore, filed the petition referring to his experience at the airport on January 31, 2024.

As per the petition, she had to wait for around 20 minutes outside the airport as no assistance was available for her transfer. Subsequently, during the security check, he was asked three times to stand in his wheelchair without any valid reason, despite his repeated explanations of his disability. It was alleged that the insensitivity shown by the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) personnel during the selection process left the petitioner feeling disrespected and deprived of her dignity.

She sought mandamus from the Court directing the respondents (Union of India, Airports Authority of India and CISF) to effectively implement the regulations and operational procedures laid down in accordance with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016; Accessibility standards and guidelines for civil aviation 2022; M Series of Civil Aviation Requirements, 2014, and screening guidelines followed by CISF security for disabled passengers.

An old bench Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala found that the issues raised in the petition require consideration at the end of the Indian Union.

On November 12, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhatiwith Official Lawyer Abiha Zaidi (for the petitioner) suggested that a joint statement the list of suggestions has been submitted.

On this basis, a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Pankaj Mithal ruled on the petition on November 12.

Suggestions from the Union so that people with disabilities can navigate the airport with dignity

The first suggestion from the Union Government is a mobile application for real-time wheelchair availability, where real-time updates on the number of wheelchairs available at specified/demarcated points at airports where users who are looking for them can approach.

Second, the mandatory availability of mechanized wheelchairs. This is aimed at wheelchair passengers traveling alone or those who may not receive timely assistance from the relevant authorities. Through this, the provision of a number of mechanized wheelchairs at each boarding gate/wheelchair collection point can be made available in order to reduce the obstacles that may be caused by their unattended navigation/ without assistance at airports.

Third, the coding of boarding passes. It is suggested that boarding passes for specially disabled people contain two new elements. The first is an “alphabetical code” which indicates the nature of the disability. The second element may be a “color scale” which can indicate the severity of the disease.

Fourth, it is suggested that the unique disability identity database be integrated with existing ticket booking websites. The database is a repository of information about people with various types of disabilities and contains a comprehensive list of disabilities in various categories.

This will contribute to a more transparent and instantaneous transmission of verified information on travelers’ disabilities and will enable them to be provided with appropriate assistance.

Fifth, specialized kiosks for distributing boarding passes should be integrated into the airport infrastructure. At airports across the country, some kiosks offer a contactless experience for receiving boarding passes. These kiosks can also be repurposed to provide access for people with disabilities. Such a repurposing would involve adding voice recognition and response technology already used by Indian Railways to help passengers determine the running status of trains across India.

Finally, it is suggested that airport staff receive regular awareness training, in addition to their regular security training. Training for this can be divided into two categories: staff who need to interact regularly with specially disabled people and all other staff. For category “a” staff, it is suggested that they be trained more regularly; either every three years or altogether.

The training would involve familiarizing staff with various forms of disabilities and their consequences for those affected. Additionally, the courses would involve training to successfully and sensitively help specially disabled people resolve any issues they may face during transportation. It is suggested that staff be subject to regular assessment on this subject.

During the hearing, Zaidi requested that all of these suggestions be treated as mandatory guidelines.

The Court accepted this suggestion and added that it should not be limited to wheelchair users. This extends to elderly and injured passengers who may need assistance with a wheelchair.

The Court further accepted Zaidi’s suggestion that the above-mentioned guidelines should not be interpreted to mean that physical assistance provided at various airports should now be withdrawn.

Finally, the Court ruled on the application not without observing: “We have the written request in the above terms with more emphasis on sensitizing the airport staff to show more compassion towards specially-abled passengers.

Click here to read/download the order