Are Swiggy and Zepto failing blind users? Delhi high court to hear accessibility case

0
16
Are Swiggy and Zepto failing blind users? Delhi high court to hear accessibility case


Can blind or visually impaired users independently order groceries or meals using India’s biggest delivery apps?

That’s the question now before the Delhi high court, after a public interest petition accused Swiggy and Zepto of failing to make their digital platforms accessible to persons with disabilities (PwDs). Filed by the New Delhi-based NGO Mission Accessibility, the case could have wide-reaching implications for digital inclusion in India’s booming app economy.

In an order issued Wednesday, the court sought responses from Swiggy, Zepto, and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY). The next hearing is scheduled for 28 May.

Read this | Brand-influencer court battles set the boundaries for creators

The petition, reviewed by Mint, alleges that the companies’ apps are unusable by people with blindness or impaired vision, in violation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016. It also cites broader constitutional violations, including the denial of equality, dignity, and freedom of expression.

“The petition seeks directions from this Hon’ble Court mandating the Respondents to ensure full compliance with digital accessibility standards,” it states. Requested features include screen reader compatibility, alternatives for inaccessible elements, and voice-guided camera assistance for tasks such as processing returns.

The NGO says it first flagged these issues with the companies’ customer support teams but received no meaningful response—evidence, it argues, of disregard for accessibility requirements and a breach of both legal and ethical duties.

Email queries to Swiggy and Zepto went unanswered.

Read this | Quick commerce is on steroids. So, why is Dalal Street not cheering

Among the key complaints: Swiggy’s search box is unresponsive to screen readers, making it impossible for visually impaired users to search for products. Payment options are reportedly inaccessible, preventing transaction completion. Other features—including Instamart’s voice search, Swiggy’s DineOut and table reservation services, and newer offerings like Snacc and Pyng—are also said to be difficult or impossible to navigate without sight.

The petition also highlights a significant hurdle during image capture for returns or refunds. Without voice prompts or haptic feedback, blind users are unable to position their cameras correctly—effectively barring them from completing basic transactions.

These shortcomings, the petition notes, fall short of India’s first national digital accessibility standard—BIS IS 17802—introduced in 2023. The standard mandates features like labeled icons and screen reader compatibility across all digital platforms. According to the petition, Swiggy and Zepto have yet to comply.

Mission Accessibility is asking the court to direct the platforms to undergo a formal accessibility audit, publish a public roadmap to fix the gaps, train their staff in digital accessibility, and disclose conformance reports.

Read this | ‘Shocks the court’s conscience’: Delhi HC pulls up Baba Ramdev over Rooh Afza remarks, directs video takedown

The case follows broader enforcement efforts: In February, the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (CCPD) fined 155 entities—including the Ministry of External Affairs, Tata Digital, Reliance, National Depository Ltd, Pluxee India, and Yatra Online Ltd—for failing to meet digital accessibility standards.


Swiggy accessibility, Zepto accessibility, visually impaired users India, digital accessibility India, food delivery app accessibility, Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, Delhi High Court Swiggy case, screen reader compatible apps, Mission Accessibility NGO, BIS IS 17802 standard, blind users digital rights, MeitY accessibility petition, accessibility audit India, Swiggy Zepto court case, digital inclusion India
#Swiggy #Zepto #failing #blind #users #Delhi #high #court #hear #accessibility #case

Leave a Reply