Shri Thawar Chand Gehlot

Minister for Social Justice & Empowerment

Government of India

Dear Gehlot ji,

We are approaching you, having learnt about the proposal by the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, to amend the Rehabilitation Council of India Act.

Without doubt, the RCI Act is outdated and it precedes even the 1995 Persons with Disabilities Act. Various developments have taken place since then, which need to be taken into account. Nevertheless, we find that the proposed amendments do not fully reflect and take cognisance of the immense changes that have taken place. We feel that the attempt is piecemeal.

You may recall that after India ratified the UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the process to harmonise our laws started with a set of over a hundred amendments being proposed to the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. However, disability rights organisations and activists, felt, and rightly so, that amendments would not suffice to reflect the UNCRPD. The government of the day agreed and the process of drafting a new law to replace the PwD Act started, which was finally passed during your first tenure as MSJE in December 2016.

Apart from the latest developments, what we observe is that the amendments do not take into account the myriad issues including the functioning and administration of the RCI, about which complaints are galore. While some of these can be in the form of amendments, they would fail in adopting a holistic approach. Our intent here is not to go into the details of the amendments being proposed.

We firmly believe that what is needed is a new legislation to replace the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992. This sentiment is also being expressed by various other organisations and disability rights activists with whom we have had informal consultations. The department may also solicit responses from other stakeholders on this. 

We sincerely hope that you will consider this demand seriously and will not proceed to get the amendments passed in haste.

In the meanwhile, we would also request that time be extended for at least a month for stakeholders to respond to the proposals.

With regards

Yours sincerely,


  1. Muralidharan, General Secretary, National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled 
  2. S K Singh, Secretary General, National Association for the Blind
  3. V Gopalakrishnan, General Secretary, All India Federation of the Deaf
  4. Kanti Ganguly, General Secretary, Paschim Banga Rajya Prathibandhi Sammelani, West Bengal
  5. Namburajan, General Secretary, Tamilnadu Assn for the Rights of Differently-Abled & Caregivers, Tamilnadu
  6. Vandana Gopikumar, Founder Trustee, The Banyan
  7. Prof. M Ravichandran, Secretary, All India Confederation of organisations for Persons with Mental Disability
  8. P Mohanan, President, Differently-Abled Welfare Federation, Kerala
  9. Sathwik Adivaiah, General Secretary, Vikalangula Hakkula Jathiya Vedika, Telangana
  10. 10.Prof TMN Deepak, state President, December 3 movement, Tamilnadu
  11. 11.Kapil Kumar Aggarwal, President, Federation of Disabled Rights
  12. 12.Mukesh Gupta, General Secretary, Disabled Employees Association of Railways
  13. 13.Appala Naidu, General Secretary, Vikalangula Hakkula Jathiya Vedika, Andhra Pradesh
  14. 14.Rishikesh Rajli, General Secretary, Haryana Viklang Adhikar Manch, Haryana
  15. 15.Rangappa Dasar, General Secretary, Karnataka Rajya Angavikalara Mattu Palakara Okkota
  16. 16.Salil Debbarma, Secretary, Tripura Prathibandhi Adhikar Manch
  17. 17.Dayabhai Gajera, Gujarat Viklang Adhikar Manch
  18. 18.Shampa Sengupta, Director, Sruti Disability Rights Centre, Kolkata
  19. 19.Seema Lal, Director, Together We Can, Kerala
  20. 20.Lakshwadeep Disabled Association
  21. 21.Srikishan Ahirwal, Madhya Pradesh Viklang Adhikar Manch
  22. 22.Subash Gupta, Jharkhand Viklang Morcha
  23. 23.Nipun Malhotra, Disability Rights Activist
  24. 24.Punitha Suresh, Disability Rights activist, Tamilnadu
  25. 25.Smriti Vallath, Research head, BALM, Tamilnadu