Twenty-first century is witnessing dramatic changes in modern psychiatry and a monologue of reason about madness has given way to real dialogues between various stake holders, including patients, represented by service user organisations [1–3]. The recovery model represents an approach, which focus much more than symptom resolution and emphasises resilience and control over problems and life, which is achieved in a holistic manner with the help of therapist along with relatives, friends and community, with a strong hope that people with mental illness can have a meaningful life and can set their own goals for their life [1]. Post-modernism is a concept taken its roots from many disciplines including linguistics, literature, architecture, philosophy and science [4]. The foundations of postmodern thoughts lie in its reactions to and rejection of certain aspects of modern philosophy. It rejects epistemological assumptions, refutes methodological conventions, resists knowledge claims, obscures all versions of truth, and dismisses policy recommendations. Psychiatry has qualities consistent with a postmodern worldview like several different theoretical models to understand and explain the mental experiences and behaviour of patients, and its interactions with value laden disciplines such as philosophy, law, psychology and social sciences [4]. In its extreme formulation postmodernism is revolutionary and radically dismisses modern psychiatry, but its moderate proclamations encourage substantive redefinition and innovations in psychiatry. Such an intellectual challenge has given birth to post-modern psychiatry or ‘‘post-psychiatry’’, which means an end to the ‘‘monologue of reason about madness’’ and an explicit attempt to redefine a discourse about meanings, relationships and values in psychiatry as primary [4]. Postpsychiatry differ from anti-psychiatry in that it neither propose new theories about madness nor seek to replace the medical techniques of psychiatry with new therapies. Rather, it opens up spaces in which other perspectives can assume validity and brings up voices of service users and survivors to the centre stage [5]. There is no single definition of the concept of recovery for people with mental health problems. Post-psychiatrist had taken up recovery concept and in many ways enriched it by discussing from various dimensions. One of the major philosophical issues with modern psychiatry, according to post-psychiatrists, is the problems of dualisms exemplified by Jaspersian phenomenology and biopsychosocial model, where experiences are treated in separate realms. Heideggerian hermeneutic phenomenology proposed by postpsychiatrists sees human experience as being indissolubly tied to culture and narrative, with temporality and embodiment, resulting in negating separate biological, psychological or cultural worlds that exist outside human experience and acknowledging the complexity and integrity of human experience [6]. From the above perspective, recovery can be discussed in multiple dimensions. The most commonly accepted three meaning of recovery are the restoration of a person to a healthy or normal condition after being ill, recovery of something lost or taken away and procedure of gaining possession of some property or right by a legal verdict [6]. The major limitation with first meaning, the major meaning in modern psychiatry, is that not all who experience mental illness accept that they are ill nor they consider their experience as abnormal. Hence, recovery from the perspective of such & N. A. Uvais druvaisna@gmail.com