Madras HC: Mentally Disabled persons entitled to doorstep assessment for Disability Certificate

While delivering his order, he also expressed concern by saying "I am personally aware of the challenges faced by caregivers in cremating their disabled wards and children during the peak of Covid19 because of the absence of identification papers such as Aadhaar."

Background

The writ petitioner is on the verge of becoming a nonagenarian. His 61 years old son Shri.R.Saikumar is mentally retarded. The writ petitioner himself became a widower a couple of months back. His son-in-law died a few years ago. He is a pensioner since November 1992. His son would be entitled to receive the family pension benefits after his death. To avail of the said benefit, an entry will have to be made in the petitioner's pension book. For that, a disability certificate must be obtained.

The petitioner's daughter approached the Institute of Mental Health at Kilpauk for obtaining such a certificate. The Institute insisted that Saikumar must be brought for assessment. Saikumar can neither speak nor express himself. He cannot move about freely. He also has a severe anxiety disorder.

The certificate issued by one Dr Shanthi Chandramohan, Assistant Physician Government General Hospital, Madras Medical College dated 29.02.1992 certifying that Saikumar is permanently mentally disordered was not taken note of by the Institute of Mental Health, Kilpauk.

Left with no other option, Saikumar was taken to the Institute of Mental Health, Kilpauk in an ambulance on 26.04.2022. A group of paramedical staff literally bundled him into the vehicle. He was assessed and it was noted that he was mentally retarded. But this was deemed insufficient for the issuance of the certificate. It was insisted that Saikumar should be once again brought to the premises of the second respondent for conducting a few more tests, the petitioner said.

Since Saikumar was traumatized by what happened on 26.04.2022, he developed severe anxiety and became paranoid and whenever anybody entered his home, he held on to the bars of the window.

Even though the petitioner's daughter informed the concerned officials that it was not possible to bring Saikumar for further assessment, the personnel attached to the second respondent Institute declined to pay heed to the same.

To view the official order, click on the following link: