One of my clients recently had a case which I am explaining below and if you are stuck in such similar situation, here is what to do.
Note: Due to attorney-client privilege, I cannot disclose complete case details or identify the actual parties involved. However, I am sharing the essential facts and legal approach so that if you find yourself in a similar situation, you can understand the available solutions and legal remedies.
TL;DR: You can file a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in a High Court or the Supreme Court seeking a review of the disability framework under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, to include chronic, life-altering diseases. The key is to demonstrate that the current eligibility criteria are arbitrary and violate fundamental rights. You'll need a lawyer experienced in both constitutional law and disability rights.
Ravi Deshmukh, a 42-year-old resident of Nagpur, had been battling a severe autoimmune disorder for over a decade. The condition left him unable to work, dependent on daily medication, and struggling with basic mobility. Yet, when he applied for disability certification under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016, he was rejected. The reason? His disease was not listed in the Schedule of recognized disabilities.
Frustrated and physically drained, Ravi first approached a local general practitioner. That lawyer filed a representation, but nothing moved. Time passed. The government's silence was loud. Then, Ravi heard about the Chamber of Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India. He reached out. Advocate Sudhir Rao's office reviewed the case, studied the RPwD Act's framework, and decided that the only real route was a Public Interest Litigation (PIL).
The argument was sharp and focused: The current disability certification process excluded chronic, progressive, and life-altering diseases that are just as disabling as any listed condition. This, the office argued, violated Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 21 (right to life with dignity). The High Court agreed. It issued a direction to the government to reconsider the classification within six months. The office's expertise in disability rights and constitutional remedies was what turned the case around.
Key Facts of the Case
- Ravi had a medically documented chronic autoimmune disease causing permanent impairment.
- The RPwD Act, 2016 defines "disability" through a benchmark of 40% or more, but the Schedule of recognized conditions is restrictive.
- Ravi's application was rejected without consideration of his functional limitations.
- Earlier representation through a general lawyer yielded no response.
- Advocate Sudhir Rao's office filed a PIL in the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court.
- The Court held that excluding progressive diseases that severely impair daily living may violate fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21.
- The Court directed the government to form an expert committee to review and expand the Schedule.
The Direct Legal Answer
What is a PIL and can I file one for chronic disease patients?
Yes. A Public Interest Litigation is a legal action filed for the benefit of the public at large, not just an individual. You need locus standi — a genuine interest in the issue. You can file it in either a High Court or the Supreme Court under Article 226 or Article 32 of the Constitution. The goal is to compel the government to act on a matter of public concern, like disability rights.
What legal grounds would the PIL rest on?
You would argue that the current disability framework under the RPwD Act, 2016, is arbitrary and discriminatory. The Act's Schedule covers only specific conditions (like blindness, hearing loss, locomotor disability, etc.) but leaves out many chronic, life-altering diseases (e.g., severe autoimmune disorders, chronic kidney disease stage 4-5, post-transplant conditions, etc.). This, you argue, violates the right to equality (Article 14) and the right to life with dignity (Article 21) of such patients.
Is a PIL the only option?
Generally, yes. For systemic policy change, a PIL is the most direct tool. Individual writ petitions could also work, but they take longer and produce only case-specific relief. A PIL can result in a broader direction that benefits an entire class of patients.
Advice in Such Cases
Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation to come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.
Second, gather all medical records that objectively establish the severity of the condition. Third, collect data — how many patients face this exclusion? The more evidence you have of widespread impact, the stronger your PIL. Fourth, remember that PILs require a degree of public-spiritedness; the court may ask why you, and not someone else, is filing it. Be ready to explain your genuine concern.
Make no mistake — this type of case demands domain-specific experience. A general practitioner may not know how to frame a constitutional challenge under Article 14 or how to deal with the government's affidavit process. That's why engaging a lawyer who regularly handles disability rights matters is critical.
Applicable Sections of Law
- Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 — Section 2(r) defining benchmark disability, Section 2(zc) for Schedule of disabilities, Section 50 for certification process.
- Article 14 of the Constitution of India — Right to equality.
- Article 21 of the Constitution of India — Right to life with dignity.
- Article 32 of the Constitution of India — Right to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of fundamental rights.
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India — Power of High Courts to issue writs.
Punishment and Penalties
This is a civil/public interest matter, not a criminal case. There are no criminal punishments involved. The remedy sought is a declaration and a direction, not penalties against the government. However, if the court finds that the government's inaction was willful, it may issue contempt proceedings, but that's rare and not the primary focus here.
Jurisdiction — Where to File the Case
You have two options. First, file a PIL in the High Court of the state where the cause of action arises — typically where you reside or where the disability certificate was denied. Second, file directly in the Supreme Court of India under Article 32, arguing violation of your fundamental rights. For policy issues affecting the entire nation, the Supreme Court is more appropriate. Jurisdiction matters because it determines the court's power to hear your case, so choose carefully with your lawyer.
If You Are the Victim
- Document your medical condition thoroughly with all reports, prescriptions, and disability assessments.
- Keep a copy of your rejected application or any communication from the authorities.
- Do not file the PIL alone — always involve an advocate experienced in constitutional law.
- Consider joining a patient advocacy group to strengthen your petition with collective evidence.
- Be prepared for a longer timeline — PILs often take months to get a first hearing.
Documents You Must Keep Ready
- Identity proof (Aadhaar, PAN card).
- Comprehensive medical reports from recognized hospitals.
- Certificate from a government medical board stating the nature and extent of impairment.
- Copy of the rejection letter (if any).
- Representations made to the government and their responses (or silence).
- Any relevant correspondence, emails, or RTI responses.
What Evidence Is Required?
- Primary evidence: Medical records, diagnostic reports, hospital discharge summaries.
- Secondary evidence: Affidavits from treating doctors explaining the disabling nature of the disease.
- Statistical data: Number of patients affected, government's own data on pending applications.
- Legal evidence: Copy of the RPwD Act, relevant rules, and any government circulars.
- Comparative evidence: How other countries treat similar chronic diseases under disability laws.
How Courts Typically Approach Such Cases
Courts are generally sympathetic to PILs that challenge arbitrary government classifications in the disability sphere. They recognize that the right to life with dignity includes the right to state support for those who are genuinely disabled. However, they also defer to the government's expert committees on medical definitions. So the court will likely ask for a committee to review the matter rather than redefining the Schedule itself. The key is to show empirical evidence that the exclusion causes real, disproportionate suffering.
Timeline of Legal Process
- Day 1-7: Consultation with lawyer, document gathering, drafting of the PIL.
- Day 8-30: Filing the PIL in the High Court or Supreme Court.
- First hearing: Usually within 4-8 weeks. Court issues notice to the government.
- Government's response: Typically 4-8 weeks after notice.
- Next hearing: Arguments on maintainability and then on merits.
- Final judgment: Can take 6-18 months depending on the court's schedule and complexity.
- If relief granted: The government may be directed to form a committee within 3-6 months.
Understanding the Costs
The total cost of a matter like this varies significantly from one case to the next — it depends on the complexity of the dispute, the forum involved, the number of hearings, and the specific facts of your situation. There is no single fixed figure that applies to everyone.
A professional advocate can give you an accurate estimate only after reviewing all your facts and documents in a consultation.
Can the Matter Be Settled Out of Court?
PILs are not typically settled in the traditional sense because they involve a public interest, not private parties. However, the court can issue interim directions and the government may, during the pendency of the PIL, issue a notification or form a committee to address the issue. That would effectively resolve the matter. Mediation is rare in PILs but not impossible if the dispute is about a specific policy. The best possible outcome is a court-ordered, time-bound government action to revise the Schedule.
Common Mistakes People Make
- Filing the PIL without proper evidence — a vague petition gets dismissed quickly.
- Delay in acting — once the disability worsens or the condition becomes irreversible, it's harder to prove urgency.
- Signing documents without reading them — never sign a vakalatnama or petition form without your lawyer explaining every clause.
- Speaking to the opposite party (government officials) without counsel present — this can weaken your case.
- Posting on social media about the case — it may be used against you to show motives other than public interest.
- Engaging a lawyer who does not regularly handle PILs or disability rights cases — general practitioners often miss nuanced constitutional arguments and procedural strategies that can make or break a PIL.
FAQs People Normally Have
Can I file a PIL as an individual patient?
Yes, you can file as an individual. But it's stronger if you represent a group, like a trust or patient association.
Will the court immediately order the government to include chronic diseases?
Not immediately. The court typically asks the government to form an expert committee to study the issue. But a favorable judgment can force action within a fixed timeline.
Do I need to exhaust all other remedies before a PIL?
For a PIL, you don't need to exhaust all other remedies. The court will hear you if there's a clear violation of fundamental rights affecting a large class of people.
How long does a PIL typically take from filing to judgment?
In the High Court, 6-12 months is common for a PIL. In the Supreme Court, it can take 12-18 months, sometimes longer. An early hearing is possible if you show urgency.
Can I file a PIL without a lawyer?
Technically, yes. You can file in person. But it's highly risky. PILs require precise constitutional arguments and procedural steps. Without a lawyer, you're likely to get dismissed.
This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate about your specific situation.
Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India