Holding

Until the Schedule of the 2009 Act is amended, the pupil‑teacher ratios prescribed in the special‑needs schemes are binding, and the Court adopts a stop‑gap ratio of 8:1 for cerebral palsy, 5:1 for intellectual disability/ASD/SLD, and 2:1 for deaf‑blind or multiple disabilities, mandating creation of permanent posts for qualified special teachers.

Summary

The petitioners, teachers with B.Ed. (Special) and D.Ed. (Special) qualifications, sought a mandamus directing the Union and State governments to appoint regular special teachers for children with special needs (CwSN) in accordance with a 1:5 pupil‑teacher ratio. The Court examined the interplay of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992, and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, noting that the 2009 Act’s Schedule does not prescribe separate norms for CwSN. It held that, until the Schedule is amended, the pupil‑teacher ratios specified in the various special‑needs schemes must be followed as a stop‑gap. Accordingly, the Court adopted the ratios of 8:1 for cerebral palsy, 5:1 for intellectual disability, ASD and specific learning disabilities, and 2:1 for deaf‑blind or multiple disabilities, and ordered the creation of permanent posts for qualified special teachers. The judgment also directed State Commissioners to monitor compliance and required the Central Government to notify uniform norms, while directing interim measures such as itinerant teachers and training of general staff.

Issues considered

The extent of the obligation of schools to maintain a specific pupil‑teacher ratio for CwSN under the RTE Act, 2009 and related statutes
Whether the central government must issue a notification amending the Schedule of the RTE Act to prescribe distinct ratios for special schools and general schools admitting CwSN
The legality of employing special‑needs teachers on a contractual basis without tenure
The applicability and hierarchy of the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992, the RPwD Act, 2016, and various centrally sponsored schemes in determining teacher‑student ratios

Legislation cited

National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999s. 10, s. 2(a), s. 2(c), s. 2(g), s. 2(h), s. 2(j), s. 2(o)
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995
Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992s. 11, s. 12, s. 13, s. 13(2), s. 13(3), s. 2
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009s. 19, s. 20, s. 25, s. 25(2), s. 26, s. 27, s. 28, s. 2(ee), s. 2(n), s. 30, s. 3(3)
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016s. 16, s. 17, s. 31, s. 32, s. 74, s. 79, s. 81, s. 82

Subjects

Inclusive educationPupil‑teacher ratioSpecial education teachersRights of childrenRehabilitation Council of IndiaContract teachersChildren with special needsRPwD Act 2016RTE Act 2009

Judgment

1142 [2021]
SUPREME COURT 5 S.C.R. 1142
REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS.
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 132 of 2016)
B OCTOBER 28, 2021
[A. M. KHANWILKAR, DINESH MAHESHWARI
AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Rights of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act,
2009: ss. 2(ee), 2(n), 3(3), 19, 20, 25-28, 25(2) – Rights of Persons
C with Disabilities Act, 2016 – ss. 16-18, 31, 32, 79, 82 – Children
with special needs/disabled children (CWSN) – Appointment of
special and trained teachers in accordance with the pupil-teacher
ratio – Need for – Writ petition on behalf of teachers having B.Ed.
(Special) and D.Ed. (Special) degree/diploma courses and fully
D trained to cater to the requirements of CWSN – Grievance as regards
illegality being committed by the concerned State and its Authorities
in employing them in recognised schools on contract basis without
any certainty of tenure – Direction sought to the respondents to
ensure the free and compulsory education to each and every CWSN
as per the Rules, Regulation and Schemes stated, by initiating the
E process of appointment of Special Teachers as per the Teacher-
Pupil ratio i.e. 1:5 – Held: 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 – As such need for comprehensive approach by the
F concerned Authorities – In view thereof, the Central Government to
notify the norms and standards of pupil-teacher ratio for CWSN
and until then as a stopgap arrangement to adopt the pupil-teacher
ratio as 8:1 for children with cerebral palsy; 5:1 for children with
intellectual disability, ASD and specific learning disabilities; and
2:1 for deaf-blind and a combination of two or more of the seven
G disabilities mentioned therein; to create permanent posts as per the
just ratio for the rehabilitation professionals/special teachers; to
complete appointment process for the posts within the stipulated
period; to optimize the resource persons and as a stopgap
arrangement, avail services of special trained teachers as itinerant
teachers within the school block (cluster schools); to give
H
1142
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1143
& ORS.

compulsory training and sensitized teachers and staff in the general A
schools to handle the CwSN; and to merge unviable special schools
with relatively viable special schools in the neighbourhood –
Issuance of directions to the State Commissioners to ensure that
corrective and remedial steps are taken within the specified time –
Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992 – ss. 2, 11 to 13 – Persons
B
with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full
Participation) Act, 1995 –National Trust for Welfare of Persons
with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple
Disabilities Act, 1999 – Constitution of India – Art. 32.
Issuing directions, the Court
C
HELD: 1.1 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 Children/Child with Special Needs in particular (including in
the special schools established to impart education and training
to CwSN), in light of the central enactments and the schemes D
governing the pupil-teacher 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 E
have been placed in the Concurrent List by the Constitution
(Forty- second Amendment) Act, 1976. [Para 11][1169-D-E]
1.2 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 F
“The Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992” to provide for
the 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 G
thereto. [Para 12][1169-F-G]
1.3 With the need to have a formalized scheme for imparting
quality education to CwSN in absence of any specific law on that

H
1144 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A subject, the Union framed the 1992 Scheme. The recital of the
Scheme itself indicates that there was a phenomenal expansion
of educational opportunities in the post-independence 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
B
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.
C 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. The concern is with the regime specified regarding
D
special teachers and in particular, the pupil- teacher ratio to be
maintained in the concerned schools and their qualifications and
training. On similar lines, Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) of
‘Inclusive Education of the Disabled at Secondary Stage (IEDSS)’
came to be articulated during the same time. [Paras 16, 17][1173-
E D-G; 1175-G]
1.4 The Parliament also enacted a law to deal with persons
with disability titled “The Persons with Disabilities (Equal
Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act,
1995”. This Act, however, stood repealed by the Right of Persons
F with Disabilities 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. [Para 18][1175-G-H; 1176-A-B]
1.5 The Parliament also enacted the National Trust for
G Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental
Retardation and 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 connected therewith or
incidental thereto. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of this
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1145
& ORS.

Act mentions that the Government of India has become A
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 Disabilities, to discharge the
B
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 powers and
duties of the Board of trustees, procedure for registration of any
association of persons with disability, or any association of parents
of persons with disability or a voluntary organisation and setting C
up of local level committees and related matters, have been spelt
out in the 1999 Act. This Act, however, makes no provision
regarding the pupil-teacher 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
D
National Policy on Education (NPE), 1986 and the 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 E
(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
F
stood subsumed in this Scheme (IEDSS). [Paras 19, 20][1176-B-
D; 1177-D-G]
1.6 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 G
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)
H
1146 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A in an inclusive and enabling environment, and to provide
educational opportunities and facilities to such students in the
general education system at the secondary level. 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
B
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
C secondary level, they were to be trained in particular strategies.
The appointment of special educators has been specifically
mentioned in the IEDSS Scheme. [Paras 21, 22][1177-G-H; 1178-
A-B; 1179-E-G]
1.7 The Ministry of Human Resource Development,
D Department of Elementary Education & Literacy also formulated
a separate scheme for universal elementary education titled
“Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan 2004”, to address the specific concern
of CwSN and for encouraging them to take admission in primary
schools. The aims and objectives of this Scheme were to provide
useful and relevant elementary education for all children in the 6
E 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. This Scheme has been subsumed in the
subsequent Scheme propounded for mapping, improvement of
infrastructure, upgradation of human resource, and management
F and facilitating good quality education to CwSN. [Para 24][1180-
D-G]
1.8 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 Education Act, 2009. This Act generally applies
G
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 compulsory inclusive
H elementary education to all and more importantly quality education
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1147
& ORS.

in the neighbourhood school. That is the responsibility not only A
of the schools run or supported by the appropriate Government,
but also of schools which are not dependent on Government’s
funds. [Para 25][1180-G-H]
1.9 Strikingly, the Schedule of the 2009 Act has not been
amended to deal with the aspirations and special needs of the B
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 C
the schools governed by the 2009 Act in reference to CwSN has
been made by the special law. [Para 32][1186-B-C]
1.10 The pupil-teacher 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 D
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 E
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) would be obliged to fulfil such
condition at the time of seeking recognition from the competent F
authority and for continuing the same. [Para 33][1186-D-F]
1.11 It would be in the fitness of things that the Central
Government itself, in exercise of powers under Section 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 G
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

H
1148 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
non-educational purpose, other than those specified in Section
27. Once Schedule stands amended, the schools would 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
B
specified in Section 26 of the 2009 Act. [Para 34][1186-F-H]
1.12 It is imperative to provide for an express norm and
standard regarding CwSN - pupil and teacher ratio to be maintained
by the schools concerned, so as to discharge the responsibility
fastened in terms of Section 29 regarding curriculum and
C evaluation procedure, in a holistic and effective manner. The
norms and standards, in particular regarding pupil-teacher 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
D 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 pupil-teacher
ratio, if they so desire, for ensuring imparting of quality education
E to its students. [Paras 35, 36][1187-C-E]
1.13 Until the Schedule of the 2009 Act stands amended,
pupil-teacher 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
F education to be imparted in the neighbourhood school ought to
be adhered to. [Para 37][1187-F]
1.14 Just as the 2009 Act ushered in paradigm shift in
delivery of right of children to free and compulsory education,
the 2016 Act is a comprehensive Act to repeal the 1995 Act and
G 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

H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1149
& ORS.

by the signatory States for empowerment of persons with A
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
B
Convention for empowerment of persons with disabilities.
[Para 41][1190-G-H; 1191-A-B]
1.15 The 2016 Act, in a way, is a general enactment for
giving effect 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 C
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 platform to the CwSN to avail
the rights of full participation by means of inclusive and quality D
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 E
regard. [Para 42][1197-H; 1198-A-C]
1.16 To effectuate the 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 F
Disabled 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 and Empowerment, Government of India. Taking
note of the severity of the situation revealed by the Census of G
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 mentions the model projects to be undertaken for

H
1150 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A that purpose. Part-B of the DDRS deals with the “Model Project
Profiles”. The sub-categories mentioned thereunder are -
“Project for Pre-School and Early Intervention and Training”
followed by “Special Schools for Children with Disabilities”, and
its sub- categories, namely, “Special School for the Children with
Intellectual Disability”; “Special School for the Children with
B
Hearing & Speech Disability”; and “Special Schools for the
Children with Visual Disability”. For each of the projects, the
strength of each school has been noted, including the pupil-
teacher beneficiary ratio range which varies with the severity, in
cases of children with multiple disabilities. It recognises the fact
C that children with multiple disability may require maximum and
special education and hence, the ratio may be between 4:1 and
6:1. The DDRS has delineated the ratio for 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. [Paras 44, 45][1202-A-C,
D
G-H; 1203-A-C]
1.17 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
E Schedule to the Act. The Central Government in exercise of the
enabling power in Section 20, by now, ought to have provided
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
F also is covered within the expansive definition of schools in
Section 2(n) of the 2009 Act. [Para 46][1203-D-E]
1.18 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
G norm regarding pupil-teacher ratio specified in the concerned
scheme in vogue including the DDRS and the Samagra Shiksha-
an integrated Scheme for School Education (SSS) issued by
Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human
Resource Development. [Para 47][1203-F]

H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1151
& ORS.

1.19 The ratio of pupil-teacher has been mentioned in the A
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
B
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 C
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 that purpose, the concerned schools
D
are obliged to create posts of rehabilitation professionals/special
education teachers commensurate to number of (CwSN) students
in the given school. [Para 50][1216-H; 1217-A-D]
1.20 As a stopgap arrangement until the competent
authority formulates a comprehensive action plan including to
specify the norms and standards regarding pupil-teacher ratio to E
be maintained by the concerned schools imparting education to
CwSN, this Court is persuaded to adopt the pupil-teacher ratio
ascertained in the case of Ms. Reshma Parveen vs. The Director,
Directorate of Education as 8:1 for children with cerebral palsy;
5:1 for children with intellectual disability, ASD and specific F
learning disabilities; and 2:1 for deaf-blind and a combination of
two or more of the seven disabilities mentioned in the
recommendation No. (iii) by the State Commissioner. Indeed, the
teachers to be so appointed need to be duly qualified, recognized
and registered with the Council in light of s. 13 of the 1992 Act.
[Para 52][1221-D-F] G

1.21 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

H
1152 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B
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
C of special arrangements for imparting education to them and not
constricted by the general enactment of 2009 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
D
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
E general law governing the norms and standards to be observed
by the schools which indeed may include a special school.
[Para 53][1221-F-H; 1222-A-D]
1.22 The 2009 Act recognizes the special treatment needed
for the child with disability by insertion of s.2(ee) and s.3(3), which
F 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 home-
based 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
G 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

H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1153
& ORS.

for CwSN, by providing distinct dispensation for the general A
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 u/s.20 and enabling
provisions in the 2009 Act. [Para 54][1222-D-F]
1. 23 Indisputably, the schools registered as special schools B
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. [Para 55][1222-G]
1.24 As of today, there is a dearth of rehabilitation C
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 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 D
the number of special teachers to overcome the deficit. 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 E
Unified District 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. [Para 56][1222-H; 1223-
A-C] F

1.25 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 pupil- teacher ratio for special schools G
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. Reshma Parveen, The Director, Director Gate of Education;
H
1154 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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 fill-in vacancies for
B 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;
C 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;
D
E. Until sufficient number of special teachers becomes
available for general schools and special 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;
E
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
F 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. [Para 57][1224-D-H; 1225-A-E]
1.26 The nature of observations made and directions issued,
not limited to the States of Uttar Pradesh and Punjab, but would
G
operate across the country (all States and Union Territories).
[Para 58][1225-E-F]
1.27 With a view to ensure that the directions are effectively
complied with, the State Commissioners in the concerned States/
Union Territories are directed to forthwith initiate suo motu
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1155
& ORS.

enquiries regarding compliance and then make recommendation A
to the appropriate authority (of the concerned State/Union
Territory), as may be necessary, so that the authority would 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
B
State Commissioners may then submit report in respect of
compliances/non-compliances within their concerned State/Union
Territory to this Court within the specified period. [Para 59][1225-
F-H]
1.28. It is deemed appropriate to issue directions to the
State Commissioner(s) (which includes the States of Uttar Pradesh C
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.
[Para 61][1226-B-C]
Ms. Reshma Parveen vs. The Director, Directorate of D
Education Case No. 824/1014/2019/04/9072-84
decided on 31.12.2019 – referred to.
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No.132
Of 2016.
E
(Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India)
With
Writ Petition (Civil) No.876 of 2017.
Shoeb Alam, Prashant Shukla, Suyash Srivastava, Ms. Shreya
F
Mishra, Ms. Madhumay Mishra, Satyajeet Kumar, Advs. for the
petitioners.
Ms. Madhvi Divan, ASG, R. Bala, Sr Adv., Ms. Priyanka Prakash,
Ms. Beena Prakash, G. Prakash, Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, Akshay
Amritanshu, Ms. Vimla Sinha, Ms. Nidhi Khanna, Gurmeet Singh Makker,
Vinay Garg, Tanmaya Agarwal, Anuvrat Sharma, Krishnanand Pandeya, G
Ms. Uttara Babbar, Mrs. B. Sunita Rao, Ms. Deepika Gupta, Ms. Taruna
Ardhendumauli Prasad, Piyush Dwivedi, Rohit K. Singh, Mirza Kayesh
Begg, Prakhar Srivastav, Pashupathi Nath Razdan, Ravindra Sadanand
Chingale, K. V. Jagdishram, Ms. N. P. Haibila, Ms. G. Indira, D. Mahesh
Babu, Abhinav Mukerji, Rishi Malhotra, Suhaan Mukerji, Vishal Prasad, H
1156 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A Nikhil Parikshith, Abhishek Manchanda, Sayandeep Pahari, M/s Plr
Chambers And co., Ms. Eliza Bar, Abhimanyu Tewari, Sibo Sankar
Mishra, Aravindh S., Ms. Akansha Singh, Ravish Singh, Krishnanand
Pandey, Abdul Qadir, Ms. Ritika Singh, Anand S. Jondhale, Sunil Prem
Lalla, Gulfeshan Javed, Atiqur Rahman Siddiqui, Abbula Kalam, Dilshad
Bohra, Ninanda Nair, Satish Pandey, Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, Advs. for
B
the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.
1. These petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India are
C 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 with Special Needs1
also known as Divyang, including to impart 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
D
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 pupil-teacher ratio i.e., 5:1.
E 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 pupil-
teacher ratio is maintained in the recognized schools, by appointing
F 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, Regulation and Schemes stated
G
above by initiating the process of appointment of Special Teachers
as per the Teacher-Pupil 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)
1
H for short, “CwSN”
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1157
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

two posts or minimum number of posts in each and every schools A
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 B
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,
..…” C
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)/ D
Disabled Children as per the Rules, Regulation and Schemes stated
above by initiating the process of appointment of Special Teachers
as per the Teacher-Pupil 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 E
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, F
directing the respondents to create and appoint 18053 Special
Teachers for class I to V and 1478 Special Teachers for
class IX to XII 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
G
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
H
1158 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B 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
C 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
D 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.
E
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 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
F 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.”
G 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
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1159
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

who are eligible to teach the specially abled children. Needless to A
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
B
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 C
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 D
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 for
additional schools where children with special needs and the
teachers for the said schools and also for normal school children E
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. F
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 G
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. H
1160 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B
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
C 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
D
such types of disorder may be 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.
E
List on 27.11.2017.”
7. Further, on 4.12.2017, the Court after referring to the affidavit
filed by the Special Secretary, Primary Education, Government of Uttar
Pradesh and the submissions made across the Bar, noted thus:
F “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
G 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
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1161
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

functional. The special schools are imparting education to visually A
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 non-residential category. A chart has been filed indicating to
the said effect.
B
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 Lucknow. There are two special C
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 D
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 E
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 F
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
G
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; H
1162 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A (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
B 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
C 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.”
D 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.
E 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
F while filing the affidavit shall keep in view the language employed
in Section 3 of the Act which deals with equality and non-
discrimination. 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
G
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
H Committee, who shall visit the schools and file a report within six
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1163
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

weeks hence. The State of U.P. shall make all arrangements for A
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 factual position B
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: C
“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 D
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS.
Vs.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
E
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.132 OF 2016
CHART

F

G

H
1164 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1165
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H
1166 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A

B

C

D

E

Learned Additional Advocate General for the State of U.P.,
F
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.
G 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
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1167
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

the schools are made fully functional in all respects before the A
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 B
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 C
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.” D
8. The Court had granted time to the respondent-State(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 19922. The order reads
thus: E
“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 F
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 G
Committee to submit periodical report to this Court on monthly
basis.
List the matters on 10th July, 2019.

2
for short, “1992 Scheme” H
1168 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A We are conscious of the fact that some of the time-lines
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
B Curiae informed the Court about further steps taken by the Uttar Pradesh
State Government. The same was recorded in the following words:
“Learned counsel for the State has tendered compliance
affidavit. An advance copy of the compliance affidavit was served
on the learned Amicus Curiae.
C 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
D 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.
E List the matter after four weeks.”
10. Another relevant order passed in the proceedings, which needs
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.
F
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
G 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
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1169
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

in the form of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory A
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 have bearing
on dispensation to be provided by all the States and the Union B
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 C
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), D
in light of the central enactments and the schemes governing the pupil-
teacher 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 E
have been placed in the Concurrent List by the Constitution (Forty-second
Amendment) Act, 1976.
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 Rehabilitation F
Council of India Act, 1992”3 to provide for the constitution of the
Rehabilitation Council of India4, 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 G
in the said Act when enacted, read thus:
“2. Definitions.—(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise
requires, —
3
for short, “1992 Act”
4
for short, “Council” H
1170 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A (c) “handicapped”5 means a person-
(i) visually handicapped;
(ii) hearing handicapped;
(iii) suffering from locomotor disability; or
B (iv) suffering from mental retardation;
(d) “hearing handicap” 6 means deafness with hearing
impairment of 70 decibels and above, in the better or
total loss of hearing in both ears;
(e) “locomotor disability”7 means a person’s inability to
C
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
D
incomplete development of mind of a person which is
specially characterised by sub-normality of intelligence;
(k) “recognized rehabilitation qualification” means any of
the qualifications included in the Schedule;
E (n) “rehabilitation professionals” means—
(i) audiologists and speech therapists;
(ii) clinical psychologists;
(iii) hearing aid and ear mould technicians;
F (iv) rehabilitation engineers and technicians;
(v) special teachers for educating and training
the handicapped;
5
Stands substituted by Rehabilitation Council of India (Amendment) Act (38 of 2000),
S. 3 (Recd. President’s assent on 4-9-2000) to the following effect: -
G (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)
6
Omitted by Rehabilitation Council of India (Amendment) Act (38 of 2000), S. 3
(Recd. President’s assent on 4-9-2000)
7
Omitted by Rehabilitation Council of India (Amendment) Act (38 of 2000), S. 3
H (Recd. President’s assent on 4-9-2000)
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1171
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

(vi) vocational counsellors, employment officers and A
placement officers dealing with handicapped;
(vii) multi-purpose rehabilitation therapists, technicians;
or
(viii) such other category of professionals as the Central
Government may, in consultation with the Council, B
notify from time to time;
(o) “Visually handicapped”8 means a person who suffers
from any of the following conditions, namely: —
(i) total absence of sight;
C
(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.”
D
(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
E
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 F
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 the G
Schedule shall be sufficient qualification for enrolment on the
Register.

8
Omitted by Rehabilitation Council of India (Amendment) Act (38 of 2000), S. 3
(Recd. President’s assent on 4-9-2000) H
1172 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A (2) No person, other than the rehabilitation
professional who possesses a recognised rehabilitation
qualification and is enrolled on the Register,—
(a) shall hold office as rehabilitation professional or any such
office (by whatever designation called) in Government or in
B any institution maintained by a local or other authority;
(b) shall practice as rehabilitation professional anywhere
in India;
(c) shall be entitled to sign or authenticate any certificate
required by any law to be signed or authenticated by a
C rehabilitation professional;
(d) shall be entitled to give any evidence in any Court as an
expert under section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 of
any matter relating to the handicapped:

D Provided that if a person possesses the recognised
rehabilitation professional qualifications on the date of
commencement of this Act, he shall be deemed to be an enrolled
rehabilitation professional for a period of six months from the
commencement, and if he has made an application for enrolment
on the Register within said period of six months, till such application
E is disposed of.
(2A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2),
any person being a doctor or a paramedic in the field of physical
medicine and rehabilitation, orthopaedics, ear, nose or throat
(ENT), ophthalmology or psychiatry, employed or working in any
F hospital or establishment owned or controlled by the Central
Government or a State Government or any other body funded by
the Central or a State Government and notified by the Central
Government, may discharge the functions referred to in clauses
(a) to (d) of that sub-section.
G (3) Any person who acts in contravention of any
provision of sub-section (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.”
H (emphasis supplied)
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1173
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

15. Two aspects emerge from this provision. The first is that a 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
B
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 C
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 Scheme itself indicates D
that there was a phenomenal expansion of educational opportunities in
the post-independence 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 E
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 F
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 pupil-teacher ratio to be
maintained in the concerned schools and their qualifications and training. G
The same reads thus:
“11. Special Teacher Support
Except for children with locomotor disabilities, special
education teachers may be appointed in schools where the scheme
is in operation to provide specific attention to the disabled children. H
1174 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 12. Appointment of Special Teachers
12.1 The teacher-pupil ratio for special education teachers
envisaged under the scheme is 1:8. This ratio will be the
same for normal classes as well as for preparatory pre-school
classes. The same teachers will provide counselling to the
B parents. In accordance with this ratio the requisite number
of special teachers may be appointed in schools (or for a
cluster of schools) for children requiring special teacher
support.
12.2 Qualifications
C Special teachers so appointed should possess the following
qualifications:-
(a) Primary : Academic qualifications as prevalent in the States
and Union Territories with one year course, preferably multi-
category, in special education or with specialization in teaching
D any type of disabled children depending upon the category of
children enrolled in the IEDC Units. Such teachers can be
oriented subsequently in the education of other categories of
disability.
(b) Secondary: Graduates with B. Ed. (Special Education) or
E any other equivalent professional training in special education.
Prescribed qualifications should be adhered to. In case
qualified special teachers are not available, teachers with short
training course may be appointed with the condition that they will
complete the full course within three years of appointment, special
F allowances for these teachers will be admissible only after
completion of the full course. Teachers with single disability
professional courses will be encouraged to take courses in other
disabilities to improve viability in rural areas.
Since teachers with experience in Non-Formal Education
G (NFE) and Adult Education (AE) are likely to have a better
understanding of local environment and need, they could also be
identified for training under the scheme and appointed as special
teachers.
12.3 Scale of pay : The same scales of pay as available to the
H teachers of the corresponding category in that State/UT will be
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1175
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

given to special teachers. Considering the special type of duties, A
these teachers will be given a special pay of Rs. 150 per month in
urban areas and Rs. 200 per month in rural areas. The State
Education Department may recruit such teachers for this purpose
following the normal recruitment procedures.
13. Training of Special Teachers B
The facilities for the training of special teachers are readily
available in the Regional Colleges of Education (RCEs), Regional
Training Centres being run by the National Institute for the
Handicapped, Special Education Departments in the universities
and selected colleges for Education. The training facilities are C
being further expanded. The State Government may prepare an
estimate of the requirements of teachers under each category of
disability and send it to the Regional Colleges of Education/District
Institutions of Education and Training (DIETs), National Institutes
for the Handicapped and the University Grants Commission under
intimation to the NCERT. Since the appointment of fully trained, D
full-time resources teachers is an essential input for the successful
implementation of the Scheme, the State-Government/UT
Administration must ensure appointment of such teachers on
priority basis.
Under the scheme, grant is available through UGC for E
instituting full-time training courses for special teachers. The
university/training institutes are expected to utilize the existing
infrastructural facilities and other resources to the extent possible.
The cost of the additional aids/equipment/space, and the additional
faculty members will be met from the funds under this scheme. F
DIETs should organize in-service training courses for general
teachers and refresher courses for resource teachers.”
(emphasis supplied)
17. On similar lines, Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) of
‘Inclusive Education of the Disabled at Secondary Stage (IEDSS)’9 came G
to be articulated during the same time.
18. The Parliament also enacted a law to deal with persons with
disability titled “The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities,
9
for short, “IEDSS Scheme” H
1176 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995”10. This Act,
however, stood repealed by the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act,
201611, 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.
B 19. The Parliament also enacted the National Trust for Welfare
of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple
Disabilities Act, 199912 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 connected therewith or incidental
thereto. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of this Act mentions
C
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 Disabilities13, to discharge the
D 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).
E
The objects of the Trust are spelt out in Section 10, which read thus:
“CHAPTER III
OBJECTS OF THE TRUST

F 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;
(b) to strengthen facilities to provide support to persons with
G disability to live within their own families;

10
for short, “1995 Act”
11
for short, “2016 Act”
12
for short, “1999 Act”
13
H for short, “Trust”
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1177
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

(c) to extend support to registered organisations to provide need A
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 B
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 C
rights and full participation of persons with disability; and
(h) to do any other act which is incidental to the aforesaid objects.”
20. The powers and duties of the Board of trustees, procedure
for registration of any association of persons with disability, or any
association of parents of persons with disability or a voluntary organisation D
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 pupil-teacher 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
E
(NPE), 1986 and the 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 F
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 G
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
H
1178 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A opportunity to complete four years of secondary schooling (classes IX
to XII) in an inclusive and enabling 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:
B “2. Aims and Objectives
…..
The objectives of the scheme will be to ensure that
- Every child with disability will be identified at the
C 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,
D 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
E 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.

F - 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
G
elementary schools and studying in secondary in Government,
local body and Government-aided 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
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1179
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

• Blindness A
• Low vision
• Leprosy cured
• Hearing impairment
• Locomotor disabilities B
• Mental retardation
• Mental illness
• Autism
C
• 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 D
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 E
be trained through regular programmes run by the National Institutes/
Apex Institutes of the Council or under any other programmes of the
States. Further, in-service 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 F
assessments, planning an individualized and need-specific 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:
“5. Components of the Scheme G
5.1 …..
5.2.II Costs of non-beneficiary-oriented 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: H
1180 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A (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
B 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 Appendix-I).
C …..”
(emphasis supplied)
23. It is unnecessary to dilate on other aspects of the IEDSS
Scheme, as the core issue to be answered by us for the time being is
about pupil-teacher ratio to be maintained by the schools concerned.
D
24. The Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department
of Elementary Education & Literacy also formulated a separate scheme
for universal elementary education titled “Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan
2004”14, to address the specific concern of CwSN and for encouraging
them to take admission in primary schools. The aims and objectives of
E 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.
F 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
G
education to children between the age of 6 and 14 years consequent to
the enactment of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education
Act, 200915. This Act generally applies to all the schools, be it a general

14
for short, “SSA 2004"
15
H for short, “2009 Act”
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1181
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

school or a special school. Further, rights of all the children between the A
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 compulsory inclusive elementary
education to all and more importantly quality education in the
neighbourhood school. That is the responsibility not only of the schools
B
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: C

“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 D
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;”
E
(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,— F
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;”
Further, the expression “child with disability” has been defined in G
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,—
H
1182 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A (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)
B 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,
C 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
D 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
E
right to free and compulsory education in a neighbourhood school
till the completion of his or her elementary education.
(2) For the purpose of sub-section (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.
F
(3) A child with disability referred to in sub-clause (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 sub-clauses (B) and (C) of clause (ee) of section 2, have
G 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):
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1183
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

Provided that a child with “multiple disabilities” referred to A
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 home-based education.”
B
(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: C
“19. Norms and standards for school.— (1) 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 D
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.
(3) Where a school fails to fulfil the norms and standards
within the period specified under sub-section (2), the authority E
prescribed under sub-section (1) of section 18 shall withdraw
recognition granted to such school in the manner specified
under sub-section (3) thereof.
(4) With effect from the date of withdrawal of recognition under
sub-section (3), no school shall continue to function. F
(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.” G
(emphasis supplied)
29. The Schedule referred to in Section 19 is part of the 2009 Act,
which reads thus:

H
1184 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H (emphasis supplied)
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1185
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

30. It may be useful to also advert to Sections 25, 27 and 28 of the A
2009 Act, which read thus:
“25. Pupil-Teacher Ratio.—(1) Within three years from the
date of commencement of this Act, the appropriate
Government and the local authority shall ensure that the
Pupil-Teacher Ratio, as specified in the Schedule, is B
maintained in each school.
(2) For the purpose of maintaining the Pupil-Teacher Ratio under
sub-section (1), no teacher posted in a school shall be made
to serve in any other school or office or deployed for any
non-educational purpose, other than those specified in C
section 27.
27. Prohibition of deployment of teachers for non-
educational purposes.— No teacher shall be deployed for
any non-educational purposes other than the decennial
population census, disaster relief duties or duties relating D
to elections to the local authority or the State Legislatures
or Parliament, as the case may be.
28. Prohibition of private tuition by teacher.—No teacher
shall engage himself or herself in private tuition or private teaching
activity.” E
(emphasis supplied)
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 Children to
Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 201016, which reads thus:
F
“22. Maintaining pupil-teacher ratio.— (1) The sanctioned
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 G
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 sub-rule (1).
16
for short, “2010 Rules” H
1186 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A (2) If any person of the Central Government, appropriate
Government or the local authority violates the provisions of sub-
section (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
B 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
C the schools governed by the 2009 Act in reference to CwSN has been
made by the special law.
33. It is unnecessary to underscore that the pupil-teacher 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
D 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,
E 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.
F
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 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
G 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 non-educational purpose, other than those specified in Section
27. Once Schedule stands amended, the schools will be obliged to comply
H with the norms and standards to give effect to the intent of the 2009 Act
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1187
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

and fill up vacancies of teachers in the manner specified in Section 26 of A
the 2009 Act, which reads thus:
“26. Filling up vacancies of teachers.—The appointing
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 B
that vacancy of teacher in a school under its control shall not
exceed ten per cent. of the total sanctioned strength.”
35. It is imperative to provide for an express norm and standard
regarding CwSN - pupil and teacher ratio to be maintained by the schools
concerned, so as to discharge the responsibility fastened in terms of C
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 pupil-teacher ratio, specified in the Schedule of the 2009 Act,
are only to delineate the minimum benchmark. It is open to the State D
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 pupil-teacher ratio, if they so desire, for E
ensuring imparting of quality education to its students.
37. As aforesaid, until the Schedule of the 2009 Act stands
amended, pupil-teacher 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 F
be imparted in the neighbourhood school, ought to be adhered to.
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 G
Government of India
Ministry of Human Resource Development
================================================
09-September-2010 13:13 IST
H
1188 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B 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.
C 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
D provisions of the RTE Act and implement the combined RTE-
SSA programme. New norms under SSA for uniforms,
transportation costs and residential schools to implement the
combined RTE-SSA programme have also been included.
(ii) Revision of the funding pattern for the combined RTE-SSA
E 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.”
39. Another press release came to be issued on 6.12.2010 by the
F Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, which reads thus:
“Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment
================================================
G 06-December-2010 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
H section of the society are as under-
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1189
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

The Right of Children to Free & Compulsory Education A
(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 6-14 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
B
Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and has committed a
funding of Rs. 2,31,233 crore for implementation of the combined
RTE-SSA 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 C
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 D
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 E
assessment, appropriate educational placement, 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.
F
A centrally sponsored scheme of “Inclusive Education for
Disabled at Secondary Stage” (IEDSS) has been implemented
since 1-4-2009 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 G
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.” H
1190 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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:
B “REHABILITATION COUNCIL OF INDIA
(A Statutory Body under the Ministry of Social Justice and
Empowerment)
=================================================
No.7-91/RCI-2011/ Date 11.01.2012
C
SPEED POST
Address as list
Sub: Minimum requirement of RCI approved qualification
for appointment of Special Education Teachers: reg.
D
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
E the Council and shall come into force with immediate effect.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully
Sd/-
(Dr. J.P. Singh)
F
Member Secretary
Encl as above”
The above communication has appended guidelines as to minimum
requirement of the Council approved qualification for appointment of
G special education teachers, which need not be reproduced.
41. Just as the 2009 Act ushered in paradigm shift in delivery of
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
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1191
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

with Disabilities (UNCRPD) by India in 2007, which lays down certain A
principles to be followed by the signatory 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
B
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 C
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 leprosy- D
cured.
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 E
United Nations adopted its Convention all, the Rights of Persons
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 subsequently ratified the same on
the 1st day of October, 2007. The Convention came into effect on
the 3rd day of May, 2008. Being a signatory to the Convention, F
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, Vice-Chairperson, Indian Institute
of Cerebral Palsy, Kolkata submitted its report in 2011, suggesting G
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: H
1192 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A (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
B Government have been enumerated;
(iv) all educational institutions funded by appropriate
Government shall provide inclusive education to the
children with disabilities;

C (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,
D 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
E 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
F 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.
G
5. The Bill seeks to achieve the above objects.”
(emphasis supplied)
One of the salutary provisions of the 2016 Act which may have
bearing on the issue under consideration, is the definition clause. The
H expression “barrier” is defined in Section 2(c); “care-giver” in Section
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1193
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

2(d); “discrimination” in Section 2(h); “high support” in Section 2(l); A
“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
B
Chapter III under the heading “Education”. Section 16 deals with “Duty
of educational institutions”, which reads thus: -
“CHAPTER III
EDUCATION
16. Duty of educational institutions. — The appropriate C
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 D
equally with others;
(ii) make building, campus and various facilities accessible;
(iii) provide reasonable accommodation according to the
individual’s requirements;
E
(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; F
(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 G
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) H
1194 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B section 16, namely:—
(a) to conduct survey of school going children in every
five years for identifying children with disabilities,
ascertaining their special needs and the extent to
which these are being met:
C Provided that the first survey shall be conducted
within a period of two years from the date of
commencement of this Act;
(b) to establish adequate number of teacher training
institutions;
D
(c) to train and employ teachers, including teachers
with disability who are qualified in sign language
and Braille and also teachers who are trained in
teaching children with intellectual disability;
(d) to train professionals and staff to support inclusive
E
education at all levels of school education;
(e) to establish adequate number of resource centres
to support educational institutions at all levels of
school education;
F (f) to promote the use of appropriate augmentative and
alternative modes including means and formats of
communication, Braille and sign language to supplement
the use of one’s own speech to fulfil the daily
communication needs of persons with speech,
communication or language disabilities and enables them
G to participate and contribute to their community and
society;
(g) to provide books, other learning materials and
appropriate assistive devices to students with benchmark
disabilities free of cost up to the age of eighteen years;
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1195
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

(h) to provide scholarships in appropriate cases to students A
with benchmark disability;
(i) to make suitable modifications in the curriculum and
examination system to meet the needs of students with
disabilities such as extra time for completion of
examination paper, facility of scribe or amanuensis, B
exemption from second and third language courses;
(j) to promote research to improve learning; and
(k) any other measures, as may be required.”
(emphasis supplied) C
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. D
Section 31 under the said Chapter envisages free education for children
with benchmark disabilities. The same reads thus: -
“CHAPTER VI
SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR PERSONS WITH
BENCHMARK DISABIITIES E
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 F
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.” G
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
H
1196 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B 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 empowers the State
C 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: -
“80. Functions of State Commissioner.— The State
D Commissioner shall—
(a) identify, suo motu or otherwise, provision of any law
or policy, programme and procedures, which are
in consistent with this Act, and recommend
necessary corrective steps;
E (b) inquire, suo motu or otherwise deprivation of rights
of persons with disabilities and safeguards
available to them in respect of matters for which
the State Government is the appropriate
Government and take up the matter with
F appropriate authorities for corrective action;
(c) review the safeguards provided by or under this Act or
any other law for the time being in force for the
protection of rights of persons with disabilities and
recommend measures for their effective implementation;
G (d) review the factors that inhibit the enjoyment of
rights of persons with disabilities and recommend
appropriate remedial measures;
(e) undertake and promote research in the field of the rights
of persons with disabilities;
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1197
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

(f) promote awareness of the rights of persons with A
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; B
(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.” C
(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 D
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: - E
“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 F
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.” G
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.
42. The 2016 Act, in a way, is a general enactment for giving
effect to the rights of persons with disabilities which includes the CwSN. H
1198 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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 platform to the CwSN to avail
the rights of full participation by means of inclusive and quality education
B
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 pupil-teacher ratio is
maintained without exception, including as specified under the law made
by the Parliament or the scheme enunciated by the executive in that
C 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) of the
Central Board of Secondary Education17 to all concerned, directing to
D 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
E
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
F
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 Bye-Laws of Board in which direction was issued to
all the affiliated schools to mandatory appoint SPECIAL
G
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.
17
H for short, “CBSE”
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1199
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

However, it has been observed that many schools affiliated A
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
B
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 C
Managing Committee for strict compliance.
(Jaiprakash Chaturvedi)
Deputy Secretary (Affiliation)”
(emphasis supplied)
D
Even the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities had
issued similar communication to all concerned on 25.10.2016 bearing
F.No. 11-9/CCD/2016/R4755, which reads thus: -
“COURT OF CHIEF COMMISSIONER FOR PERSONS
WITH DISABILITIES E
Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment
Government of India
F.No.11-9/CCD/2016/R4755 Dated 25.10.2016
To, F
The Chief Secretary/Administrator,
All States/Union Territories
(As per list)
Sub: Practice by unqualified person in the field of Disability
rehabilitation- reg. G
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).
H
1200 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B
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.
3. It is to bring to your kind notice that RCI have been allocated
C 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
D 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
E 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 &
F 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,
G Sd/-
(Dr. Kamlesh Kr. Pandey)
Chief Commissioner for
Persons with Disabilities
Encl: as above”
(emphasis supplied)
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1201
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

It is also significant to advert to the communication-cum-statutory A
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 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 B
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) C
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. D
It has been observed by the Council that Children with
Disabilities (Divyangjan) are being trained/served by
Quacks/Unqualified/Non-registeredPersonnel/
Professionals.
If anyone found serving “Persons with Disabilities E
(Divyangjan)”, without having RCI Certification, shall be
prosecuted before the Court of Law under Section 13(3) of
RCI Act, 1992 as under:
“Any person who acts in contravention of any provision of
sub-section (2) shall be punished with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend F
to one thousand rupees, or with both”.
General Public is requested to report such instances to
the Council along with documentary evidence by post/fax/
email to enable the Council to take appropriate action such
as filing of FIR against such persons. G
“This Statutory Warning is issued in public interest”.
(Dr. Subodh Kumar)
Member Secretary
Dated: 14.05.2019"
(emphasis supplied)
H
1202 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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 Rehabilitation
Scheme”18 (revised guidelines with effect from 1.4.2018) has been
articulated by the Department of Empowerment for Persons with
B
Disabilities (Divyangjan), Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment,
Government of India19. 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,
C this scheme 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
D
I. Pre-Schools and Early Intervention and Training
II. Special Schools for Children with Disabilities for
a. Intellectual Disability
b. Hearing & Speech Disability
E
c. Visual Disability
III. Project for children with Cerebral Palsy
IV. Rehabilitation of Leprosy Cured Person
F V. Half Way Home for Psycho-Social Rehabilitation of Treated
and Controlled Mentally III persons
VI. Home-Based Rehabilitation and Home Management.
VII. Community Based Rehabilitation Programme
VIII. Low Vision Centres
G
IX. Human Resource Development”
Part-B of the DDRS deals with the “Model Project Profiles”.
The sub-categories mentioned thereunder are - “Project for Pre-School
18
for short, “DDRS”
19
H for short “DEPwD”
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1203
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

and Early Intervention and Training” followed by “Special Schools for A
Children with Disabilities”, and its sub-categories, 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 each of the projects, the strength
of each school has been noted, including the pupil-teacher beneficiary
B
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.
45. Suffice it to note that the DDRS has delineated the ratio for
the concerned special schools and it may be commensurately replicated C
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 D
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 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 E
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 F
pupil-teacher ratio specified in the concerned scheme in vogue including
the DDRS and the Samagra Shiksha — an integrated Scheme for
School Education20 issued by Department of School Education and
Literacy, Ministry of Human Resource Development21.
48. Chapter 2 of the SSS gives the background in which the scheme
G
has been formulated to cover all children from the age of 4 to 18 years
and has a scope across all levels of school education from pre-school to
senior secondary on universal basis to ensure the education of all children.

20
for short, “SSS”
21
for short, “DSEL” H
1204 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B 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
C 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.
D 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
E 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 non-cognitive areas.
4.1.3 The Centrally Sponsored Scheme of Integrated Education
F
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
G 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
H time-bound targets for the achievements of UEE. With “zero
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1205
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

rejection’ as its cornerstone, the programme provided support for A
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.
B
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), C
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 D
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 disabled-friendly. The Centrally Sponsored
IEDSS Scheme aimed at enabling all students with disabilities E
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
opportunities and facilities to students with disabilities in the general
education system at the secondary level (classes IX to XII).
F
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, G
Government-aided 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. H
1206 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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.
B • 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.

C • 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,
D 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. For existing special educators,
E
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.
F
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY
THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ACT,
2016
CHAPTER III
G EDUCATION
16. 22
17. 23
22
Section 16 reproduced in paragraph 41 above.
23
H Section 17 reproduced in paragraph 41 above
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1207
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

4.2 Target Group A
4.2.1 The scheme will cover all children from pre-school to senior
secondary stage studying in Government, local body and
Government-aided schools, with one or more disabilities as defined
under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (2016) namely:
1. Blindness B

2. Low-vision
3. Leprosy Cured persons
4. Hearing Impairment (deaf and hard of hearing)
C
5. Locomotor Disability
6. Dwarfism
7. Intellectual Disability
8. Mental Illness
D
9. Autism Spectrum Disorder
10. Cerebral Palsy
11. Muscular Dystrophy
12. Chronic Neurological conditions
E
13. Specific Learning Disabilities
14. Multiple Sclerosis
15. Speech and Language disability
16. Thalassemia
F
17. Hemophilia
18. Sickle Cell disease
19. Multiple Disabilities including deaf blindness
20. Acid Attack victim G
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. H
1208 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B
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
C 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:-

D (i) Identification and assessment of children with disabilities.
(ii) Provision of aids and appliances, medical services, diagnostic
services etc.
(iii) Access to and development of teaching learning
material as per requirement etc.
E (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.
F
(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 Classes-I to XII.
(vii) The use of ICT to increase access to a vast amount of
G 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
H the general education system.
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1209
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

4.3.2 Resource support A
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
Annexure-III. All special educators should be registered B
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, covering
a group of schools where children with special needs are C
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 D
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.

E

F

G

H
1210 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B learning outcomes. This teacher education programme will
be recurrent at block/cluster levels and integrated with the
on-going in-service 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 children with special needs.
C 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.
D 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
E 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
F the Department of Disability Affairs are enclosed at Annexure-
IV. 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
G 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
H time. The Individualized Support should review the
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1211
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

effectiveness of various strategies and support services A
used by children with special needs periodically, after
developing indicators.
4.8 Building synergy with special schools
4.8.1 In case of non-availability of resources required for
education of children with special needs and training of B
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.
C
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 D
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 E
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
F
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
G
compared to providing physical access as it requires an in-depth
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 role to play in this context. Social access
could include the following: H
1212 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A i. Parental training
ii. Peer sensitization
iii. Awareness building of different stakeholders across all
levels

B iv. Special emphasis will be given to education of girls with
disability
4.11 Monitoring & Evaluation:
On-going monitoring and evaluation should be carried out to refine
the programme from time to time. For this, appropriate monitoring
C mechanisms and tools are to be devised at every level and field
tested at regular intervals.
ANNEXURE-III
GUIDELINES FOR APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL
EDUCATORS
D
1. Minimum Educational Qualifications for becoming an
Educator for Classes preschool-V (Pre School to Primary
Stage)
(a) Classes I-V: Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with
at least 50% marks and 2-year Diploma in Education
E (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.

F 2. Minimum Qualifications for becoming an Educator for
Classes VI-VIII (Elementary stage)
(a) Graduation with at least 50% marks and 1-year B.Ed.
(Special Education)24
Or
G Graduation with at least 50% marks and 2- year B. Ed.
(Special Education)25
24
For candidates who have graduated in B.Ed. (Special Education) in/before 2015-16
i.e. the 1 year course.
25
For candidates who have graduated in B.Ed. (Special Education) after 2015-16 i.e. the
2 years course (in regular or distance mode).
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1213
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

(b) Pass in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted A
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 IX-XII: (Secondary stage)
• All Special Educators must be registered with the B
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.
C
• 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 D
Education) or B. Ed. (Special Education) qualification shall
undergo, after appointment an NCTE recognized 6-month
Special Programme in Elementary Education.”
(emphasis supplied)
49. Besides the above-mentioned scheme, the Ministry of E
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.
F
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 G
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
subject-teaching knowledge and understanding of subject-
H
1214 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A related 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 pre-service as well as in-
B
service mode, either full time or as part-time/blended courses -
again, necessarily, at multidisciplinary colleges or universities.
Greater synergy will be enabled between the course
curriculum of NCTE and RCI to ensure adequate availability
of qualified special educators who can handle subject
C 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: -
D
“7. Efficient Resourcing and Effective Governance through
School Complexes/Clusters
7.1. While the establishment of primary schools in every habitation
across the country-driven by the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA),
E now subsumed under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme and other
important efforts across the States - has helped to ensure near-
universal access to primary schools, it has also led to the
development of numerous very small schools. According to U-
DISE 2016–17 data, nearly 28% of India’s public primary schools
and 14.8% of India’s upper primary schools have less than 30
F 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 single-teacher
schools, the majority of them (85743) being primary schools serving
G 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
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1215
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

have no prior background; key areas such as music, arts, and A
sports are too often simply not taught; and physical 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 teaching-learning process. Teachers function B
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 C
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 D
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 E
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), F
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 teaching-learning
content, joint content development, holding joint activities G
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
devolving all finer decisions, to Principals, teachers, and H
1216 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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 semi-
autonomous unit.
7.6. One possible mechanism for accomplishing the above
B 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
C 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.
D 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 topic-
centred clubs and academic/sports/arts/crafts events across
E 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
F 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,
G school leaders, teachers, students, supporting staff, parents,
and local citizens would energize and empower the schooling
system, and in a resource-efficient manner.”
(emphasis supplied)
50. Be it noted that the ratio of pupil-teacher has been mentioned
H in the stated schemes besides the norms and standards specified in the
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1217
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

Schedule to the 2009 Act. Indeed, the Schedule to the 2009 Act makes A
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
B
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 home-based education. The fact remains that for
meaningful and effective imparting of education and training to CwSN, C
different norms and standards ought to be followed and for 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 D
Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, National Capital Territory
of Delhi in the case of Ms. Reshma Parveen vs. The Director,
Directorate of Education26. 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 E
Education Teachers at different levels namely i.e. Pre-
school/ Nursery (For children in the age group 4-6 years);
Primary and Upper Primary (For Classes I-VIII);
Secondary/High School (For Classes IX-X) and Senior
Secondary/Intermediate (For Classes XIXII). RCI was
once again advised to facilitate and suggest, preferably in F
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. G
(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 Teachers
26
Decided on 31.12.2019 in Case No. 824/1014/2019/04/9072-84 H
1218 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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)
B 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
C 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
D 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
E Autism Spectrum Disorder, Intellectual Disability,
Learning Disability, Deaf-Blind, Visual
Impairment, Hearing Impairment and Cerebral
Palsy which are RCI approved Teacher Training
Courses.
F 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 Teachers in a particular
G
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
H disabilities; and 1:2 for Deaf-Blind and a
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1219
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

combination of two or more of the seven disabilities A
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 B
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 Out-of-
School Children in the Age 6-13: Social & Rural C
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 D
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 E
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 F
cannot be different criteria for the schools of DoE
and that of the Corporations.
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 2-3 KMs where all
G
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. H
1220 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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.
B
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
C 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
D 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
E 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.
F ix) All in-service mainstream teachers at all levels,
i.e. Pre-Primary, 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
G 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.
H
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1221
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

x) NCERT should include a compulsory module on A
teaching of children with disabilities in its online
digital platform ‘Swayam’ for training of In-service
teachers.
xi) DoE, Govt. NCT of Delhi should develop guidelines for
the inclusive education and inclusive schools in NCT of B
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.
C
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) D
52. As a stopgap arrangement until the competent authority
formulates a comprehensive action plan including to specify the norms
and standards regarding pupil-teacher ratio to be maintained by the
concerned schools imparting education to CwSN, we are persuaded to
adopt the pupil-teacher ratio ascertained in this decision as 8:1 for children E
with cerebral palsy; 5:1 for children with intellectual disability, ASD and
specific learning disabilities; and 2:1 for deaf-blind 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. F
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 G
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 recognized and registered by the Council under the
1992 Act. The operation of the two Acts being Union enactments, need
H
1222 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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
B
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
C 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.
54. As a matter of fact, the 2009 Act recognizes the special
D 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 home-based education if the child is inflicted
with multiple disabilities or severe disability, as the case may be. What is
E 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
F 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.
55. Indisputably, the schools registered as special schools are also
governed by special legislation and the schemes framed therefor and
G 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
H can impart education and training to handicap person/CwSN. This disparity
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1223
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

will have to be addressed by the National Council of Teachers Education27 A
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
B
present, there are only 1,20,781 special educators registered with the
Council. As per the available data with the Unified District 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 C
stated in the affidavit of Mr. Anil Gairola, Under Secretary in the Ministry
of Education, dated 12.7.2021. The State-wise 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: -
D

E

F

G

27
for short, “NCTE” H
1224 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A

B

C

D 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 pupil-teacher ratio for special schools and
E 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. Reshma Parveen 28
F 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;
G C. To initiate appointment process to fill-in 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

28
H supra at Footnote No. 28
RAJNEESH KUMAR PANDEY & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1225
& ORS. [A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.]

order or before the commencement of academic year 2022- A
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 B
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 schools, the services C
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 D
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 E
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). F
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 Territories to forthwith
initiate suo motu enquiries regarding compliance and then make
recommendation to the appropriate authority (of the concerned State/
G
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/non-compliances within
their concerned State/Union Territory to this Court by end of February, H
1226 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 5 S.C.R.

A 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.
B 61. Further, we deem it appropriate to presently issue directions
to the State Commissioner(s) (which includes the States of Uttar 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
C 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
non-miscellaneous day, for consideration of the reports received from
D 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, Advocate-on-Record 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
E 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 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
F 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.
G
Nidhi Jain Directions Issued.

H