HELP AT HAND: The cover of the handbook and (top) a still from Black where Rani Mukherjee plays a blind and deaf-mute girl who fights to conquer her disability

It’s not what you’d call a bestseller really, but the Handbook on Employment of Persons with Disabilities in Government of India packs in far more information than Dan Brown put in in The Da Vinci Code. While there has been no glitzy bash in the hippest place in town to announce its release, this 500-odd-pager may eventually live longer in public memory than many other paperbacks which arrive on bookshelves with a bang. And, at a time when the country is still debating the issue of reservation, this publication is a novel effort to set the records straight for a few unsung people who also have a right to the reservation pie, even if that’s a minor three per cent.

That, in short, is how one could describe the Handbook on Employment of Persons with Disabilities in Government of India, released a few weeks ago by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in an attempt to sum up and simplify the nuances of Indian law ? in this case, the Disabilities Act, 1995 ? devoted to upholding the cause of disabled citizens seeking employment in the country. Devised as a ready reference, the handbook answers some of the most common queries ? as well as a few complex ones ? that arise when it comes to giving priority to the disabled over others at the time of employment.

Discrepancies regarding the employment of the disabled in posts reserved for them clearly exist. “Of all the grievances that filter into our office, nearly 80 per cent is related to employment,” says Rajeev Raturi, an advocate at the New Delhi-based Human Rights Law Network (HRLN). “Right now, some 25 such cases are being fought in several courts across Delhi,” he adds.

Most of the disputes arise out of a lack of knowledge of the appropriate procedures that need to be followed while employing people with disabilities. “The complexity of the law makes the issue of employment a common problem for both employers and employees,” says Anuradha Mohit, a long-time activist for people with disabilities, and one of the book’s two co-authors.

Several such intricacies, such as the degree of impairment in vision, hearing or locomotor disabilities that deem a candidate eligible for selection, or the various kinds of allowances and privileges that the disabled are entitled to in the workplace, have been touched upon in the handbook. One of the more critical issues dealt with is the several clauses of exemption ? mentioned in Section 33 of the Act ? which offices can resort to in order to dissolve the stipulated reservation. Exemptions can be granted if offices can prove that it is not possible for them to extend reservation “in view of the nature of the duties expected to be performed by the employees in the establishment/department,” says the book, quoting an official order.

“This issue has invited much debate in the past, since the dominant mindset within the public sector is biased largely against the employment of the disabled,” says Mohit. “Around 1998-99, the University Grants Commission refused to employ disabled teachers, saying it would be difficult for them to build strong relations with students,” recalls Mohit. “Around the same time, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited rejected a candidate applying for the post of a legal officer, saying that work in the establishment was related to heavy engineering, and it was hence not a suitable environment for the disabled. Clearly, these are excuses that offices tend to come up with in trying to by-pass the disabled.”

Disabled rights activist Javed Abidi feels that the bias is well entrenched in the popular psyche as well. “Before the Disabilities Act was drafted to set the records straight, the three per cent reservation, originally provided for in the Seventies, was available only in the C and D categories,” he points out. “It was as if to say that the disabled could become chaprasis but not managers.”

Things are relatively better now, and the handbook is a welcome intervention in the direction of empowering the disabled through knowledge, says Abidi. But then, he isn’t quite sure if and when certain basic flaws within the system ? which could eventually push the handbook into the domain of redundancy in the future ? will be rectified.

The first issue here, as is suggested by the handbook’s name, is the employment of the disabled in the private sector. “The government has no guidelines for the private sector, but promises to offer incentives to employers who employ the disabled. However, till now no one has spelt out what these incentives actually may be,” notes Abidi.

That, effectively, continues to hold up the employment of the disabled in the private sector. “Secondly, in the public sector, the law states that jobs meant for the disabled need to be identified and updated every three years, owing to changing patterns over time. The last identification was done in 2000, and no updation has happened since then,” says Abidi.

Lack of initiative? Maybe. Says S.K. Rungta, general secretary, National Federation for the Blind (NFB), “The government recently revised the executive instruction for the employment of the disabled, which was passed by the department of personnel and training in December, 2005.” “But the instruction is yet to come into action.”

Public interest litigation (PIL) is perhaps the ultimate recourse critics can resort to, and that’s precisely what is on the cards, says Rungta. Meanwhile, the book is what people have on their side. “A few copies of the book have also been printed in Braille,” says K. Akram, assistant information officer, NHRC. That, at least, is practical thinking.