MANJIT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed in public interest. It prays for a mandamus directing the Government of India to ensure that all the State Governments and Local Authorities implement Section 43 of The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (for short 'the Act') in letter and spirit including allotment of dwelling units constructed under various Housing Schemes. A mandamus directing the respondents to calculate the backlog of dwelling units and to offer the same for allotment to the disabled persons has also been prayed for.

(2.) When the matter came up for hearing on 17.09.2008, the Director, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, who was also present in Court on that date, pointed out that a writ petition involving similar issues as those raised for determination in the present writ petition was pending before the Supreme Court for hearing. The hearing of the present writ petition was, therefore, deferred till disposal of the said petition by the Apex Court. The petitioner who appeared in person today points out that Writ Petition No. 576 of 2004 pending before the Supreme Court has been finally disposed off by an order dated 04.03.2009. A copy of the said order has been placed on record by the petitioner alongwith CM No. 7402 of 2009. From a reading of the said order, it is evident that the Supreme Court has directed all the State Governments and Local Authorities to grant preferential treatment to the disabled persons and to allot land at concessional rates whenever such Governments or Local Authorities make allotment for the purposes indicated in Section 43 of the Act. The Apex Court has, however, left the percentage of reservation for such allotment to the discretion of the State Governments and Local Authorities. It is also evident from the order that the Court has directed the Government to appoint a Chief Commissioner to look into the complaints of persons with disabilities in terms of Section 62 of the Act. The State Governments have also been asked to appoint Commissioners in terms of Section 60 of the Act to enable anyone aggrieved of refusal of any benefit to him/her to approach the Commissioner with a complaint for appropriate action against the Authorities. The following two passages appearing in the order passed by the Supreme Court are apposite :-

(3.) The petitioner submits that he has already approached the Chief Commissioner at Delhi with a complaint regarding violation of the provisions of the Act by the Chandigarh Housing Board, in which regard, the Chief Commissioner has sent a communication dated 18.05.2009 to the Chairman of the Board asking the latter to ensure compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court and grant the benefits due to the handicapped persons under the Act and the Scheme as formulated. The petitioner submits that the Chairman of the Board has not responded to the said communication so far. It was also urged that the State Governments have not yet appointed Commissioners in terms of Section 60 of the Act which reads as under :-