Synopsis

Two visually impaired petitioners (a lawyer and a banker) filed a public interest writ petition alleging that the mobile application of respondent no.1 (Rapido – a ride‑hailing service) was not fully compatible with screen readers and lacked essential accessibility features, making it difficult for persons with visual impairment to book, cancel, or track rides without assistance. During the pendency of the petition, Rapido implemented accessibility updates and filed compliance affidavits. The High Court held that Section 42 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 imposes a positive duty on service providers to ensure that digital interfaces are inherently accessible. The court noted that the regulatory framework (Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines) exists but must be effectively enforced. The petition was disposed of with directions to Rapido to continue accessibility audits and to the Ministry to ensure ongoing compliance. Liberty was granted to file a fresh petition if grievances persist.

Court: High Court of Delhi

Coram: Honourable Mr. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

Date of Judgment: 16th April 2026

Citation: W.P.(C) 14735/2023 (unreported)

Core Law: Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – Sections 3 (non‑discrimination), 40 (accessibility), 42 (access to information & communication technology), 43 (standards), 89 (penalty); Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 – Rule 15(2); Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 93 (aggregator guidelines); digital accessibility for visually impaired persons

2. Legal Framework

Major laws and provisions involved

• Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – Section 3 (non‑discrimination), Section 40 (accessibility in buildings, transport, etc.), Section 42 (access to information and communication technology), Section 43 (accessibility standards), Section 89 (penalty for violation)

• Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 – Rule 15(2) (continuing obligation of Ministries to ensure compliance with accessibility standards)

• Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 93 (power of central government to issue aggregator guidelines)

• Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines, 2020 – Clause 40.8 (accessibility features for persons with disabilities)

Key legal principles applied

Accessibility is a substantive equality obligation, not aspirational: Section 42 of the RPWD Act casts a clear and affirmative obligation to ensure access to information and communication technology (ICT) for persons with disabilities. This is not a mere policy directive but

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.