2017 · GS Paper 2 · Q7 · 10 marks

Does the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 ensure effective mechanism for empowerment and inclusion of the intended beneficiaries in the society? Discuss.

In short

The RPwD Act 2016 builds an effective mechanism on paper, with 21 recognised disabilities, 4% job and 5% higher-education reservation and special courts, but delivery remains partial. Rajive Raturi (2024) had to strike down advisory accessibility rules, and Commissioners still cannot compel compliance.

Model answer

Ghissu Editorial · Verified 4 Oct 2026

Introduction
Census 2011 counted 2.68 crore persons with disabilities (2.21%), far below the WHO-World Bank global estimate of about 15%. The RPwD Act, 2016, enacted to honour the UN CRPD and Article 41, builds a strong mechanism on paper, but delivery decides empowerment.
Mechanisms for Empowerment and Inclusion
•

Wider recognition

Recognised disabilities rise from 7 to 21, adding acid-attack survivors, autism and thalassaemia, so more people can claim rights.

•

Affirmative action

The Act reserves 4% of government posts and 5% of higher-education seats and guarantees free education to children aged 6 to 18.

•

Rights over charity

Limited guardianship and legal capacity treat persons with disabilities as decision-makers, not wards.

•

Enforcement

Chief and State Commissioners, district special courts and penalties for discrimination give these rights a forum.

Gaps That Weaken the Mechanism in Practice
•

Delayed accessibility

Rajive Raturi v. Union of India (2024) struck down Rule 15 because accessibility standards were merely advisory.

•

Toothless oversight

Commissioners can inquire and recommend but cannot compel departments, so complaints stall.

•

Exclusion by threshold

Reservation needs a 40% benchmark disability, and slow UDID certification shuts out many rural claimants.

•

Private and attitudinal gaps

Private employers face only an equal opportunity policy, and stigma, as Jeeja Ghosh v. Union of India (2016) showed, persists.

Conclusion
The Act provides an effective mechanism in design but only a partial one in delivery, because enforcement, certification and attitudes lag. Binding accessibility norms, empowered Commissioners and sensitisation can turn it into the inclusion that SDG 10 and Article 21 demand.

This model answer is indicative and the model can make mistakes; please verify key facts independently.

Hand-drawn diagram: Where the Inclusion Chain Breaks. Where the Inclusion Chain Breaks. Flow: Recognition → UDID certification → Entitlement → Grievance redress → Inclusion
Diagram: Where the Inclusion Chain Breaks

Practise this question

  1. 1Get the answer sheet

    Sized for this question.

  2. 2Write your answer

    Timed, by hand.

  3. 3Get it marked

    Your score and what to fix.

Share this questionWhatsAppTelegramXLinkedIn

This chapter in the exam

Persons with Disabilities2 questions

Asked in 2 of 14 sittings since 2013

2013
–
2014
–
2015
–
2016
–
2017
1
2018
–
2019
–
2020
–
2021
–
2022
1
2023
–
2024
–
2025
–
2026
–

Question from the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) Examination 2017 paper. Answer written by Ghissu's engine and checked against our editorial standards. Found an error? Tell us and we correct it within 48 hours.

Ghissu

OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·