J&K and Ladakh High Court Issues Notice On PIL Seeking Early Intervention Services For Children With Disabilities In All 20 Districts

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on Monday issued notice on a Public Interest Litigation seeking a Union Territory-wide plan to make early intervention and rehabilitation services for children with disabilities functionally available in all 20 districts of Jammu and Kashmir.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Rajnesh Oswal issued notice to the respondents when the plea was listed.

The petition has been filed by Zaheer Abbas Jan, a Srinagar-based social worker and child and disability rights activist, through advocates Junaid Mohd Junaid and Fatesh Kumar Sahu. The respondents include the Union Territory of J&K, its Health and Medical Education and Social Welfare departments, the Directors of Health Services for Kashmir and Jammu, the National Health Mission, the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, the Composite Regional Centres (CRC) at Srinagar and Jammu, and the Union of India through the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities.

At the heart of the plea is what it calls “a simple but urgent question of public law”: whether a child with a disability should lose a developmental opportunity merely because the therapy or professional the public system itself recognises as necessary is unavailable in the child’s district.

The petitioner says families from rural, hilly and remote areas are forced to make repeated trips to Srinagar or Jammu, sometimes relocating, while losing wages and school days and spending heavily on private therapy. Occupational therapy and speech therapy, it claims, are irregular or unavailable, and parents are often unsure where a child should go after being identified as needing help.

The petition stresses that early intervention is time-sensitive. According to it, “childhood development does not remain stationary while a sanctioned post is vacant, a therapy room is unavailable, or a family is asked to return after weeks.”

Relying on representations sent between August 2023 and September 2026, the petitioner argues that the grievance rests on official records and not on anecdotes alone. These include a 2023 reply from GMC Jammu citing space constraints for occupational therapy, and a 5 May 2026 communication on CRC Srinagar which recorded that a child needed speech therapy but it could not be provided because no Speech Therapist was available. A report from the Child Guidance and Well-being Centre at IMHANS, forwarded through GMC Srinagar, also acknowledged long-standing manpower shortages, unfilled posts, reduced funding and lack of dedicated space, the petition says.

Anchoring its case in Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, the plea also cites the Supreme Court’s rulings in Vikash Kumar v. UPSC, Jeeja Ghosh v. Union of India and Rajive Raturi v. Union of India. It points to the National Health Mission’s Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram, which contemplates District Early Intervention Centres.

The petitioner has been careful to limit its ask. It says the Court is not being asked to prescribe therapy or “substitute judicial opinion for clinical judgment”, but to ensure that existing laws and schemes are actually implemented.

As an immediate step, the plea seeks verified district-wise status reports on existing facilities, sanctioned and vacant posts, available professionals, equipment, waiting periods and referral pathways. It also asks for a time-bound plan to fill critical vacancies, minimum standards for public early intervention services, accessible infrastructure, individual intervention plans for children, and a clear referral chain linking anganwadis, schools, health centres, district hospitals, medical colleges and the CRCs.

Other prayers include outreach and tele-support for remote areas, parent counselling, a grievance redressal mechanism, a transparent policy on referrals to private centres with conflict-of-interest safeguards, oversight of private rehabilitation centres, and strict compliance with disability assessment and certification norms under Sections 56 to 59 of the RPwD Act. A public website listing district-wise services and vacancies is also sought.

The petitioner also sought expeditious consideration of the matter, citing its urgency.

Case Title: Zaheer Abbas Jan v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.

Date of Hearing: November 2, 2026

Bench: Chief Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Rajnesh Oswal