The Supreme Court of India on Thursday, 8 October 2026, directed the Centre to compile and place on record state-wise data on the regulation, registration, and monitoring of rehabilitation centres and other establishments catering to children with disabilities. The directive came while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that has flagged sweeping systemic failures in the protection of disabled children across the country.

The Bench and the PIL

A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana passed the directions while hearing a PIL filed jointly by disability rights lawyer Rahul Bajaj and child rights activist Zaheer Abbas Jan. The petition alleges widespread non-compliance with statutory safeguards meant to protect persons with disabilities, particularly children, in institutional care.

What the Court Has Directed

The CJI Kant-led Bench asked the Union government to coordinate with all states and Union Territories (UTs) and furnish, by way of an affidavit, comprehensive information on three counts: the constitution and functioning of statutory authorities under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016; the formulation and notification of minimum standards for mental health establishments; and the inspection and monitoring mechanisms currently in place for rehabilitation facilities. The matter has been listed for further hearing on 22 October.

Key Gaps Highlighted by Petitioners

Arguing before the Bench, Bajaj submitted that rehabilitation centres for persons with disabilities are required by law to obtain compulsory state-level registration under the RPwD Act. He stressed the urgent need for empirical data to verify whether the designated statutory authorities have actually been constituted across all states and whether they are actively discharging their regulatory and monitoring responsibilities.

Referring to the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, Bajaj pointed out that only 10 states and UTs have so far notified the requisite minimum standards for mental health establishments — a significant shortfall given the law has been in force for several years. The petition contends that a large number of institutions operating for persons with disabilities are not registered under Section 50 of the RPwD Act, which prohibits establishment or maintenance of such an institution without a certificate of registration from the competent authority.

Findings from Ground Inspection

The petitioners relied, in part, on findings from a surprise inspection conducted by the Child Welfare Committee, Srinagar, in 2025 at a child development centre. According to the plea, the institution lacked registration under both the RPwD Act and the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) Act, 1992, and suffered from inadequate infrastructure, insufficient qualified staff, and poor programme implementation. The case illustrates, petitioners argue, the gap between legislative intent and on-the-ground reality.

Broader Legislative Framework at Stake

The petition has flagged alleged systemic failures across three central statutes: the RPwD Act, 2016; the RCI Act, 1992; and the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. Collectively, these laws envisage a layered oversight architecture — from state-level registration of facilities to the operation of State Mental Health Authorities and mandated quality standards. Critics argue that the architecture exists largely on paper, leaving children with disabilities vulnerable to unregulated, under-staffed care environments.

The Supreme Court's next hearing on 22 October will determine whether the Centre has furnished the requisite affidavit, and is likely to set the timeline for states and UTs to comply — a development that could have far-reaching consequences for how India regulates institutional care for its most vulnerable citizens.