Madras High Court
M.Karpagam vs The Chief Commissioner For Persons on 21 April, 2021
Author: Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
Bench: Sanjib Banerjee, Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
W.P.No.12663 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.04.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.No.12663 of 2020
M.Karpagam ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Chief Commissioner for Persons
with Disabilities
Department of Empowerment of Persons
with Disabilities
Ministry of Social Justice Empowerment
Sarojini House, No.6, Bhagwan Das Road
New Delhi 110 001.
2. The Cabinet Secretary
Central Secretariat
South Block
New Delhi 110 001.
3. The Principal Secretary
Prime Minister's Office
South Block
New Delhi 110 001. ... Respondents
[R2 & R3 deleted vide order dated
11.09.2020 made in WP No.12663/2020]
__________
Page 1 of 6
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.12663 of 2020
Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to remove with
immediate effect the derogatory terminologies (divyang/divyangjan)
or mental retardation or any such terminologies from use in all
legislation, policies, government regulations and government
websites and from public discourse.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Prabhakaran
For Respondent-1 : Mr.R.Sankaranarayanan
Additional Solicitor General
For Mr.K.Srinivasa Moorthy
SPCGC
ORDER
(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The petitioner claims that the use of the words divyang and divyangjan or the expression mental retardation are derogatory in any legislation, regulation or policy.
2. Of late, there has been a change in the use of several expressions since they were found to be derogatory or not according __________ Page 2 of 6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.12663 of 2020 dignity to the class of persons previously answering to such description, despite there being no intent to humiliate such persons by the use of such expressions. Accordingly, corrections have been enforced across the board and it is no longer appropriate to call a person disabled, but such person is now regarded as a person with disability. Similarly, the more hurtful “blind” is not used in officialdom and the more appropriate “visually challenged” is in vogue.
3. The petitioner seeks to rely on a communication issued by the United Nations to the Government of India regarding the use of the words divyang and divyangjan. The petitioner has relied on the communication dated June 07, 2019 issued by the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, a UN Body.
4. The Government of India issued a response to the UN Body. The Union has also filed a counter-affidavit through the Director in the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. At paragraph 4 of such affidavit, the Union has detailed how the expressions divyang and divyangjan came to be adopted, in consultation with the States __________ Page 3 of 6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.12663 of 2020 and Union Territories, after words such as “handicapped” and “viklang” and the cognate variants thereof were abandoned as being harsh, rude and humiliating of the classes of persons sought to be referred to thereby.
5. What is of importance is the measures taken by the State to help the lot of some of our brethren who may not have the use of all faculties like most others or may be challenged in some form or the other. While it is also proper to ensure that hurtful epithets are not used for their description, the matter can only be taken up to a point and not stretched much further. Since it is evident that upon a conscious effort to ensure the use of appropriate words and expressions, the Union arrived at the words "divyang" and "divyangjan" in consultation with the States and Union Territories, such matter should not be stretched to the point of absurdity. Indeed, it is noticed that the expression "mental retardation" has been corrected to “intellectual disabilities”.
6. While the effort of the petitioner is appreciated to ensure that otherwise abled persons or persons with disabilities are not __________ Page 4 of 6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.12663 of 2020 demeaned or treated as pariah as a result of the manner of description of such persons, the greater emphasis should be on the effective measures adopted by the State rather than following the fad of political correctness as to the expressions used to describe them.
7. Nothing in this order will prevent better expressions to be used instead of those complained against and such better expressions evolved upon due consultation, so that persons with disabilities and those who are otherwise abled or even suffer from intellectual disabilities may find the system to be inclusive.
W.P.No.12663 of 2020 is disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. WMP No.15643 of 2020 is closed.
(S.B., CJ.) (S.K.R., J.)
21.04.2021
Index : No
kpl
__________
Page 5 of 6
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.12663 of 2020
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
(kpl)
To
The Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities Ministry of Social Justice Empowerment Sarojini House, No.6, Bhagwan Das Road New Delhi 110 001.
W.P.No.12663 of 2020
21.04.2021 __________ Page 6 of 6 http://www.judis.nic.in