PUSHKAR SINGH Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition discloses that notwithstanding clear, unambiguous and laudable objectives sought to be achieved by a decision, how it remains only on paper because of apathy, lack of will and lackadaisical approach of the authorities who are supposed to implement such decision. The laudable decision here is that of Executive Council of the University of Delhi taken vide its Resolution No; 193/3 on 16/07/1994 with a vision to help the- visually and orthopaedically handicapped persons to got teaching posts in the University and Colleges. It provided, vide aforesaid Resolution, 3 per cent reservations with immediate effect for blind and orthopaedically candidates in teaching post in the Delhi University and the Colleges affiliated to the University. It also provided that at least one disabled person must be appointed in each college during the academic year 1994-95. The Executive Council's vision is clear from the fact that what it did by aforesaid Resolution ultimately got the nod even of the Parliament which enacted Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (1) of 1996 (hereinafter to be referred as "Disability Act). The decision of the Executive Committee backed by legislative mandate remains only on paper till date is the telltale of this writ petition. This writ petition was filed in the year 1995 wherein petitioners cried foul in the manner in which the authorities slept over the matter and sought to secure the implementation of the aforesaid Resolution dated 16/07/1994. However, entangled in the web of technicalities because of routine, unmindful and hyper-technical objections taken to maintainability of the writ petition and by putting various procedural spokes, respondents have seen to it that the petition does not progress with smooth wheel. The visionary zeal remains illusory because authorities feel "crippled" in getting implemented their own orders. In the process more than 5 years have expired and the result is that it is the respondents which have compounded the problems for themselves in not implementing their own decision which was their legal, moral and social obligation to do so suo motu.

(2.) The justification of the aforesaid outburst could be traced by highlighting the relevant events that have led to filing of the present petition and the stand taken by various authorities during the currency of this petition.

(3.) This petition is filed by 5 petitioners. Petitioners 1 to 4 are individuals who are all handicapped persons either visually or orthopedically and who are aspiring to get teaching post in the University/Colleges and claim to be duly qualified for the same in all respects. Petitioner No. 5 is Indian Association for Special Education and Rehabilitation.