Entering a building in Delhi can be very challenging. Visiting a friend in her rented barsati involves climbing endless flights of stairs. Shopping or dining out – in Khan market, Connaught place, Lajpat nagar or Bengali market – often involves navigating a clunky footpath, raised thresholds, a narrow, dingy flight of stairs, and with no functioning lift. Inside buildings, the barriers persist: dimly lit corridors, locked or no accessible washrooms, steep stairs, lifts too narrow for wheelchairs or strollers; broken or obstructed tactile pavers – or no such pavers at all to guide those with impaired vision.
These are not just design flaws, but daily examples of exclusion. The absence of lifts, ramps, railings, safe entrances and exits shut many of us out. Not just from restaurants and shops, but more critically, from hospitals, clinics, police stations, courtrooms and classrooms. For persons with disabilities, this is not just a matter of inconvenience, but a denial of basic rights: to access, inclusion and against non-discrimination. This was illustrated when the ex-Chief Justice of India spoke about the difficulty of finding accessible housing for his daughters with special needs. It does not stop here – these rights are denied also to the elderly, pregnant women, parents with strollers, young children, and injured individuals – anyone not operating at peak physical mobility. This is everyday life for lakhs of people in our cities.
Failures in Implementation and On-Ground Administration
This is not just a failure of building design, but a failure to implement the promises of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (‘RPWDA’). The RPWDA Act mandates accessibility of all buildings, new and existing, as per standards notified by the Central government, all across India. However, this legal mandate has not percolated to the state and local levels. In Delhi, Chapter 11 of the Unified Building Bye-Laws, 2016 references outdated accessibility standards from 2016, instead of the revised Central government standards introduced in 2021. As a result, key updates – like the shift from a ‘barrier-free’ approach to universal design, or incorporation of accessibility dimensions for Indian style toilets, are not reflected, weakening implementation on-ground.
There seems to be a lack of follow through in implementation. While Section 44 of the RPWDA mandates that no building can be granted permission, completion or occupancy certificates without meeting accessibility norms, this requirement is often overlooked, as stakeholders routinely petition courts for redress. In 2018, a case before the Delhi State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities involving PVR cinemas made these gaps evident. The cinema’s building plan omitted key accessibility features, yet, its building plans were approved, it was issued a completion certificate, and the building opened – without ensuring compliance.
Issues also stem from fragmented and overlapping governance. For example, Delhi’s built environment is shaped by a maze of public works, development, municipal and urban planning authorities. While each controls a piece of the puzzle, there is little clarity on who is clearly accountable. In Himanshu Goswami v. University of Delhi, on 4 January 2023, the Delhi High Court was confronted with the problem of fixing inaccessible pavements. It found the relevant municipal and public works authorities kept shifting responsibility from one to another.
This legal and bureaucratic fog is symptomatic of a lack of prioritisation of accessibility, and the result is often piecemeal and tokenistic action. Inaccessible ramps, broken or obstructed tactile pavements, no accessible lifts or washrooms, and public infrastructure that continues to exclude. Until accessibility becomes a non-negotiable requirement that is stringently enforced and overseen, public buildings – in Delhi and the rest of India – will continue to shut people out.
Building Access into the Foundation of Every Building
Delhi and other states in India need to bring clarity of instruction in their laws and processes for building accessibility. The first step is harmonising the law to translate the RPWDA’s national level mandates down to the state and local level. Delhi’s Unified Building Bye-Laws must be updated to reflect the latest accessibility standards notified by the Central Government under the RPWDA. These standards must not merely be referenced – they must be made binding and integrated into every step of the building approval, audit and completion process.
Second, accessibility compliance must be treated as a non-negotiable part of building permits and completion/occupancy certificates. This process should be given the same importance as fire safety checks and should be put in place for all new and old (retrofitted) constructions per the mandate of the RPWDA.
Third, compliance cannot rest solely on audits or court direction. There is a need for laying down processes and guidelines to conduct regular, standardised and independent access audits, that are publicly disclosed and linked to clear timelines for course correction.
Fourth, implementation agencies spanning municipal and development authorities should lay out an ‘action plan’ that implements time-bound accessibility fixes for buildings providing essential services such as primary health centres, civil hospitals, and schools – as is mandated by the RPWDA.
Fifth, there is a need to lay down clear lines of responsibility to identify who is responsible for implementation across the multiple agencies typically involved in building regulation. For this, a nodal authority may be designated at the city level to coordinate accessibility implementation across departments.
Sixth, non-compliance with accessibility mandates should be linked to clear consequences: such as denial and revocation of completion/occupancy certificates, holding the relevant public officials who have approved inaccessible designs accountable; and cancellation of licenses of non-abiding architects and engineers.
Finally, inclusion must be practiced through representation and by design. This means involving persons with disabilities and accessibility experts from the start, and not as an afterthought; but as co-designers and co-inhabitants of our public buildings and spaces.
**Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog do not necessarily align with the views of the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy.
About the Authors
Manmayi is a Senior Resident Fellow working with Disability (Inclusion & Access). Manmayi is a graduate of the National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi (2016). Prior to joining Vidhi, Manmayi worked at the law firm of Dhir & Dhir Associates, where she litigated and provided advisory services to various clients in matters pertaining to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. She has also previously worked with the Centre for Law and Policy Research, where she litigated in the areas of public health, women's rights and rights of disabled.