Reena Banerjee vs Government of NCT of Delhi 2025 INSC 1101 - Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act - Reservation - Project Ability Empowerment
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - Section 34- Reservation - The principle of upward movement, whereby a meritorious reserved category candidate securing marks above the general cut-off is migrated to the unreserved list, ensures both fairness and the effective utilisation of reservations. Unfortunately, persons with disabilities are presently not given the benefit of upward movement -Union of India to explain whether appropriate measures have been taken to provide the upward movement of meritorious candidates applying against the post/s reserved for persons with disabilities, in case such candidate secures more than the cut-off for the unreserved category. The same principle must also be applied to promotions. Such consideration must be guided by the overarching aim that the true and substantive benefit of reservations reaches those most in need, ensuring that no person with disability is ignored from his rightful claim to the post, merely due to the compounded barriers of poverty, stigma, and lack of access. (Para 48-53)
Constitution of India - Article 14,19,21 - Disabled Persons - Article 14 has been expanded to include substantive equality, requiring not only equal treatment but also reasonable accommodation and removal of systemic barriers. Article 19, particularly the right to freedom of expression and movement, has been interpreted to mandate accessible formats, transport, and communication. Article 21 anchors the right to life with dignity, recognising that dignity is not a privilege but an entitlement, especially for those who are institutionally marginalised - Several Directions issued on implementation of ‘Project Ability Empowerment’ . (Para 47)
Case Info
Here are the details extracted from the judgment:
Case Name and Neutral Citation
- Case Name: Reena Banerjee and Another v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Others
- Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1101
Coram (Judges)
- Justice Vikram Nath
- Justice Sandeep Mehta
Judgment Date
- Date of Judgment: 12 September 2025
Caselaws and Citations Referred
- Jeeja Ghosh v. Union of India (2016) 7 SCC 761
- Rajive Raturi v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 243 of 2005, order dated 29 November 2023
- Vikas Kumar v. Union Public Service Commission (2021) 5 SCC 370
- Kabir Paharia v. National Medical Commission & Ors. 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1025
- Indra Sawhney v. Union of India 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217
- M. Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 212
Statutes/Laws Referred
- Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (“1995 Act”)
- Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (“RPwD Act”)
- Mental Healthcare Act, 2017
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
- Constitution of India (Articles 14, 15, 16, 19, 21, 41)
- International Treaties:
- United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
- International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
- Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
- Convention Against Torture (CAT)
- Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)

#SupremeCourt asked Union of India to explain whether appropriate measures have been taken to provide the upward movement of meritorious candidates applying against the post/s reserved for persons with disabilities, in case such candidate secures more than the cut-off for the… https://t.co/QohD4WTh6t pic.twitter.com/HcSbeu3kVY
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) September 12, 2025
#SupremeCourt on Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 19 and 21 vis-a-vis Persons with disability: https://t.co/QohD4WTh6t pic.twitter.com/zXzztKnMr3
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) September 12, 2025