Private company directed to make its app accessible to persons with disabilities

The Court of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities on Wednesday directed a private establishment make its mobile app accessible for persons with disabilities (divyangjan) [Rahul Bajaj vs Practo Technologies Pvt Ltd. & Ors.]..The direction was passed against Practo Technologies Pvt Ltd but Chief Commissioner stated that all private establishments are bound to comply with government guidelines on accessibility of websites, apps and other information and communication technology platforms. Commissioner Upma Srivastava said that all information and communication technology services were required to make their services accessible to people with disabilities under sections 40 and 46 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act."From the combined reading of Section 40 and Section 46 it becomes clear that private establishments, which are providing information & technology services are bound to make their services and infrastructure accessible for divyangjan in accordance of Section 40 and Section 46," the order said..The Court was hearing a complaint brought by a visually challenged individual against Practo Technologies Pvt Ltd over the inaccessibility of the company's website and app, as well as non-compliance with accessibility standards specified by rules.The company offers and online platform containing information about doctor partners and enables consumer to make online booking at over 9,000 hospitals. It also delivery offers services like enabling online consultation with doctors and medicine delivery by a network of pharmacies..The complainant informed the Court that the app was not accessible for persons with visual impairment owing to the following accessibility barriers:Unorganized home screen which was not accessible with a screen reading software;Unlabeled and, therefore, inaccessible second page;Results after providing inputs were inaccessible owing to the information being produced in open go rather than as different data points;Random crashing of app.As a result, he compared his experience accessing the app to that of a sighted person being required to access an app in a foreign language he does not understand, and claimed that the company failed to comply with the provisions of Section 46 of the RPwD Act even after it became effective on April 19, 2017..The respondent-company, through counsel Jagannath Nanda, denied all of the allegations while also expressing its willingness to make its technological platform accessible to people with special needs. It requested 9 months to do so.It did, however, say that it was not bound by the guidelines that required establishments to provide services in compliance with accessibility rules. The respondent also submitted that there were no government instructions that could be followed, thus it had no idea how to proceed.The defendant, the Directorate General of Health Services, told the court that the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting was the appropriate body to take necessary action in the situation..After recording that as per RPwD Act, all information and communication technology services, including the respondent-company, were bound to make their services accessible for persons with disabilities, the judgment discussed Rule 15 of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules."Again in this Rule term used is 'every establishment shall comply with ...'. Hence, it is important to look into the meaning of term 'establishment'. RPwD Rules, 2017 do not define term 'establishment' separately. The term is defined in Section 2(i) of Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2016. It is crystal clear from the reading of the section that private establishments are included in the definition of 'establishment'," it said.It also cited several guidelines to reject the company's contention that it lacked guidance due to a lack of government instructions to follow.Further, it observed that Director General of Health Services was the department which was entrusted upon to look into affairs relating to health services and could not shift its responsibility upon Ministry of Information & Technology..Therefore, it directed the company to comply with government guidelines and to make necessary modifications in no later than 9 months..Considering the wider social aspect of the issue of accessibility, the Court decided to use its powers under Section 75(lxh) of RPwD Act in order to take cognizance of the issue of non-accessibility.It, therefore, scheduled another hearing on September 20 to monitor the implementation of Section 40 and 46 of RPwD Act,2016 and Rule 15 of RPwD Rules 2017..[Read Order]