The Supreme Court on Thursday, 5 November 2026, issued notice on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking mandatory barrier-free accessibility in residential buildings, apartment complexes, and group housing developments across India under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016. The move signals judicial scrutiny of a gap that disability-rights advocates say has persisted for nearly a decade since the law was enacted.

Key Developments in Court

A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh issued notice to the Centre, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA), and the Ministry of Rural Development, directing them to respond within four weeks. The bench also agreed to tag the matter with W.P.(C) No. 243 / 2005 — existing Supreme Court proceedings that already examine accessibility-related issues — to prevent fragmented adjudication.

Counsel for the petitioner had urged the court to consolidate the cases, warning that handling them separately risked the issues being 'dealt with in a piecemeal manner.' The Justice Vikram Nath-led bench concurred, ordering the tagging accordingly.

What the PIL Argues

The petition, filed through advocate Ashutosh Senger, contends that barrier-free access is a mandatory statutory obligation under the RPwD Act — not a discretionary or aspirational target. It specifically invokes Sections 40 and 44 of the Act, which require the formulation and enforcement of accessibility standards and prohibit the grant of building permissions, completion certificates, and occupation certificates unless those standards are met.

The plea also relies on Section 2(x) of the RPwD Act, which expressly includes 'housing' within the definition of public facilities and services, to argue that accessibility obligations must extend to residential buildings. It further highlights that Section 37 of the Act — which reserves housing for persons with benchmark disabilities — risks being rendered ineffective if the allotted dwelling units themselves remain inaccessible.

The Ground Reality for Persons with Disabilities

The petition paints a stark picture of the daily barriers faced by persons with disabilities in their own homes. 'Narrow doorways, inaccessible bathrooms and toilets, and inadequate circulation spaces often prevent wheelchair users and other persons with disabilities from independently entering, moving within and using their own homes,' the plea states.

Notably, the petition flags sharp inconsistencies in how states implement accessibility standards. While some states have extended requirements to residential buildings and apartment complexes, others restrict them to group housing projects or exclude private residential buildings altogether — meaning access depends on which state a person with a disability lives in, rather than a uniform national standard.

Policy Gaps and PMAY-U Link

The PIL also references the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana-Urban (PMAY-U) 2.0 Operational Guidelines, which require states and Union Territories to make provisions for ramps and other barrier-free facilities in housing projects. The petitioner argues that without mandatory national-level enforcement, these guidelines remain aspirational. The plea urges the court to direct compliance at the planning, design, and construction stages — rather than treating accessibility as an afterthought once buildings are already complete.

With notice now issued and the case linked to long-running disability-access proceedings, the court's eventual ruling could set a binding national benchmark for how residential construction must accommodate persons with disabilities across all states and Union Territories.