Disability Rights Complaint: The Commissioner Route

Getting the disability certificate was the hard part, and you managed it. Then a government office refused an accommodation, a promotion went past you, or a building you had every right to enter had no way in. At that point most people look for a court, and stop when they see what a court costs. There is a statutory forum built exactly for this, it has the powers of a civil court, and almost nobody uses it.

Pick by who did the thing and what the thing was. Getting this wrong is the commonest reason a complaint goes nowhere.

If a Government establishment discriminated against you in employment. Section 23(1) requires every Government establishment to appoint a Grievance Redressal Officer for the purpose of section 19, and to inform the Chief Commissioner or the State Commissioner of that appointment. Section 23(2) lets any person aggrieved by non-compliance with section 20 file a complaint with that officer, who shall investigate it and shall take up the matter with the establishment for corrective action.

If that officer does not satisfy you. Section 23(4) is one line and it is your next step: you may approach the District-Level Committee on disability.

If the subject falls to the Central Government. Section 75(1)(b) empowers the Chief Commissioner to inquire, suo motu or otherwise, into deprivation of rights of persons with disabilities and the safeguards available to them, in matters for which the Central Government is the appropriate Government, and to take the matter up with the appropriate authorities for corrective action.

If the subject falls to a State Government. Section 80(b) gives the State Commissioner the identical power for matters where the State Government is the appropriate Government.

Note the words suo motu or otherwise in both. You do not have to be the victim to bring something to their notice.

The proviso to section 76 is the sentence to memorise. Where an authority does not accept a recommendation, it shall convey reasons for non-acceptance to the Chief Commissioner within three months, and shall also inform the aggrieved person. Section 81 repeats it word for word for the State Commissioner.

So a refusal is not allowed to be silent, and it is not allowed to be conveyed only between officials. You are entitled to reasons, in your own hands, within three months.

Section 23(3) also requires the Grievance Redressal Officer to maintain a register of complaints in the manner prescribed by the Central Government. That register exists, which means it can be asked for.

This is not an advisory body writing letters. Section 77(1) gives the Chief Commissioner the same powers of a civil court as are vested under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while trying a suit, in respect of:

• summoning and enforcing the attendance of witnesses
• requiring the discovery and production of any documents
• requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any court or office
• receiving evidence on affidavits
• issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents

Section 82(1) gives the State Commissioner exactly the same five powers.

Section 77(2) goes further. Every proceeding before the Chief Commissioner is a judicial proceeding within the meaning of sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code, and the Chief Commissioner is deemed to be a civil court for the purposes of section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Section 82(2) says the same for State Commissioners. In plain terms, lying to this forum is not free.

The power to requisition any public record from any court or office is the one people underestimate. If the file you need is sitting in a department that will not part with it, that is a request the Commissioner can make and you cannot.

Section 21(1) requires every establishment to notify an equal opportunity policy detailing the measures it proposes to take, in the manner prescribed by the Central Government. Section 21(2) then requires every establishment to register a copy of that policy with the Chief Commissioner or the State Commissioner.

Section 22(1) requires every establishment to maintain records of persons with disabilities in relation to employment, facilities provided and other necessary information. Section 22(2) requires every employment exchange to maintain records of persons with disabilities seeking employment. Section 22(3) makes those records open to inspection at all reasonable hours by persons authorised by the appropriate Government.

Put those together and the position is this: the organisation that just turned you down has probably filed a written policy about how it would not, and that copy sits with the Commissioner. Getting it is often more useful than arguing about what happened in the room.

Section 78(1) requires the Chief Commissioner to submit an annual report to the Central Government and permits special reports at any time on a matter of such urgency or importance that it should not wait for the annual report.

Section 78(2) is the accountability hook: the Central Government shall lay those reports before each House of Parliament along with a memorandum of action taken or proposed to be taken on his recommendations, and the reasons for non-acceptance of the recommendations, if any. Section 83 places the equivalent duty on State Governments before the State Legislature.

If your issue is systemic rather than personal, asking the Commissioner to treat it as a special report subject is a real and underused option.

Every step above generates a record held by a public authority.

1. The name, designation and contact details of the Grievance
   Redressal Officer appointed by your establishment under
   section 23(1) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016,
   and the date on which the Chief or State Commissioner was informed
   of the appointment.
2. A copy of the equal opportunity policy notified under section 21(1)
   and registered with the Commissioner under section 21(2).
3. In respect of complaint no. ......... dated ......... , the date of
   its registration in the register maintained under section 23(3),
   and the outcome of the inquiry required to be completed within two
   weeks of registration.
4. Where a recommendation was received from the Chief or State
   Commissioner in this matter, a copy of the action taken report or
   of the reasons for non-acceptance communicated under section 76
   or section 81, and the date of that communication.

Send it to the Public Information Officer of the establishment concerned. Note how the clocks interact: the RTI reply is due in thirty days under section 7 of the RTI Act, the Grievance Redressal Officer owes an inquiry in two weeks, and the authority owes the Commissioner an answer in three months. Filing the RTI early means the documents arrive while the other two clocks are still running. For the mechanics, the AI RTI Drafter handles the drafting, the RTI Timeline Calculator the dates, and the First Appeal Builder the appeal if nothing arrives. The RTI Playbook is the wider reference.

Honest limits are worth stating. The Commissioners recommend; sections 76 and 81 compel a reply and reasons, not obedience. The two week and three month clocks are duties on officers, and the Act attaches no penalty to missing them. What the framework gives you is a documented, dated trail of who was told what and when, and that trail is what makes any later remedy possible.

If it is a Government establishment, section 23(1) requires it to have a Grievance Redressal Officer, and section 23(2) lets you file with that officer, who must investigate and take the matter up with the establishment. Section 23(3) requires the complaint to be inquired into within two weeks of registration. If you remain unsatisfied, section 23(4) sends you to the District-Level Committee on disability.

The subject matter, not the seniority. Section 75(1)(b) gives the Chief Commissioner jurisdiction over matters for which the Central Government is the appropriate Government. Section 80(b) gives the State Commissioner the same power for matters where the State Government is the appropriate Government. Their powers under sections 77 and 82 are identical.

Not directly. The Commissioner makes recommendations, and sections 76 and 81 require the authority to act and inform within three months, or to convey reasons for non-acceptance within three months and also inform you. The enforcement teeth are in the civil court powers under sections 77 and 82, in the judicial-proceeding status of the hearing, and in the reports laid before Parliament or the State Legislature under sections 78 and 83.

The Act does not require one. The Commissioner may inquire suo motu or otherwise, which means a written complaint is enough to start. Because the forum can summon witnesses, require production of documents and requisition public records, a well documented complaint often does more work than advocacy.

Section 21(1) requires every establishment to notify an equal opportunity policy, and section 21(2) requires every establishment to register a copy with the Chief Commissioner or the State Commissioner. Section 22(1) requires every establishment to maintain records. The Grievance Redressal Officer duty in section 23(1), by contrast, is worded for Government establishments, so the internal complaint route differs even though the policy and record duties do not.

In a report. Section 78(1) provides for annual reports and for special reports on urgent matters, and section 78(2) requires the Central Government to lay them before each House of Parliament with a memorandum of action taken and reasons for any non-acceptance. Section 83 applies the same to State Commissioners and State Legislatures.

• The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, sections 21, 22, 23, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82 and 83. Full text on India Code at indiacode.gov.in
• The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, powers referred to in sections 77 and 82
• The Right to Information Act, 2005, sections 6 and 7, full text at RTI Act 2005 on RTI Wiki

• RTI for persons with disabilities: rights and schemes
• UDID disability card stuck? Use RTI to unstick it
• Disabled during government service? Your job is safe
• Medical board disability percentage dispute
• Legal guardianship for an adult with disability
• Documents for a disability certificate and UDID card

Reviewed by Dr. Shrawan Kumar Pathak. This page is general legal information, not legal advice. Statutory text quoted from the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 as published on India Code. Matters left to rules prescribed by the Central Government, including the form of the complaints register and of the equal opportunity policy, were not verified here.