Non-Discrimination and Reasonable Accommodation at the Private Workplace – Understanding Employer Obligations towards Persons with Disabilities

Authors: Avik Biswas, Ivana Chatterjee, Snehal Walia

Introduction

In India, the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (“RPWD Act”) establishes a comprehensive framework to protect and promote the inclusion of persons with disabilities (“PWDs”) at the workplace among other aspects of life. Although the RPWD Act prescribes certain employment-related obligations specifically for government establishments, it also incorporates broader principles of equality and non-discrimination that have wider application. As a result, the interplay between these provisions has often raised differing views on the extent of obligations imposed on private employers. However, as organisations continue to strengthen their workplace practices, understanding the scope of their obligations towards PWDs has become increasingly important. In this context, we have examined the legal framework and the recent judicial developments which throw light on this issue.

Legal framework for Protection of PWDs at the Workplace

The RPWD Act not only prohibits direct exclusion of PWDs in matters of employment but also promotes their effective participation by ensuring that workplaces are safe and accessible for them. To achieve this, the RPWD Act is founded on the principles of non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation. Section 3(3) of the RPWD Act prohibits discrimination against PWDs unless it is shown that the impugned act or omission is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. While this provision is self-explanatory, it is pertinent to understand its practical implications for private employers towards PWDs. This is because Section 2(h) of the RPWD Act defines “discrimination” in relation to disability as any distinction, exclusion, or restriction on the basis of disability which can hinder the equal exercise of all rights and freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field and it includes all forms of discrimination and denial of reasonable accommodation.

However, the question regarding the obligation to provide reasonable accommodation at private establishments often arises since Section 20(2) of the RPWD Act expressly requires only government establishments to provide reasonable accommodation to PWDs. Given that the above-mentioned provisions appear to be inconsistent with each other, this question has recently received significant judicial consideration.

Judicial Perspective

The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Vikash Kumar v. Union Public Service Commission, laid emphasis on the importance of ensuring equality for PWDs at private workplaces given the private sector’s significant role in employment generation in India. It is pertinent to note that the apex court highlighted that the guarantee of equal opportunity must be accompanied by that of reasonable accommodation given that its denial amounts to discrimination under the RPWD Act. Echoing this view, the Delhi High Court in the case of Akshat Baldwa v. Yash Raj Films, has also expressly held that private parties must ensure that reasonable accommodation is provided to enable greater accessibility for PWDs.

More recently, in concurrence with the above-stated judgments, the Karnataka High Court, in PSBB Learning Leadership Academy v. Barnali Rout, dealt with a case where a private employer argued that it was not required to provide reasonable accommodation to a teacher since Section 20 of the RPWD Act applies only to government establishments. However, the court observed that while Section 20 prescribes obligations for government establishments, Section 3 places a broader prohibition against discrimination (which, as per Section 2(h), expressly includes the denial of reasonable accommodation). Going a step further, the court explained that Section 3 does not merely prohibit discrimination, but it also embodies substantive equality rather than formal equality for PWDs. While formal equality requires treating all employees the same regardless of their disability, substantive equality places a positive obligation on the employers to ensure that PWDs enjoy rights “equally with others” through reasonable accommodation at the workplace. Therefore, the court held that a private employer’s failure to provide reasonable accommodation may itself amount to discrimination under Section 3 unless such denial can be justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Conclusively, these judgments reflect a broader judicial trend of interpreting the RPWD Act purposively to advance the rights of PWDs in private employment. The emphasis has increasingly shifted from merely prohibiting discriminatory treatment to requiring employers to take positive steps to enable the effective participation of PWDs in the workplace.

Key Action Points for Human Resources and In-House counsel

Given the above analysis, the HR and in-house teams should undertake inter alia the following measures to ensure that their organisations are compliant with the RPWD Act:

• establish a structured process for considering requests for reasonable accommodation and documenting the assessment undertaken for accepting or rejecting such requests on the ground of disproportionate or undue burden;
• ensure that recruitment, promotion, performance management and separation processes are not discriminatory towards PWDs;
• make physical and digital infrastructure accessible for PWDs; and
• review the organisation’s equal opportunity policy to ensure compliance with the RPWD Act.