In the Court of State Commissioner for
Persons with Disabilities
National
Capital Territory of Delhi
25-
D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act,
2016]
Case
No. 4/634/2014/Wel./CD/ 1755-58 Dated:
08.09.2017
In
the matter of:
Sh.
Om Prakash
DMS
Booth No. 77
Sanatan
Dharam Mandir
Laxmibai
Nagar
New
Delhi-110023
................ Petitioner
Versus
The
Chairman
New
Delhi Municipal council
Palika
Kendra
Parliament
Street
New
Delhi-110001 ………...…Respondent- 1
Asstt.
Commissioner of Police(Laxmibai Nagar)
Safdarjung
Enclave Police Station
Delhi ………...…Respondent-
2
Date
of Hearing: 28.08.2017
Present: Sh. Om Prakash, the complainant
Sh. Naheem Ahmed, Sh. Ishwar Singh, Sh. Anoop
Singh, Inspectors of NDMC
ORDER
The
above named complainant, a person with 56% locomotor disability vide his
complaint received on 22.04.2014, submitted that he was allotted a DMS booth in
Laxmibai Nagar, 14 years ago. There is
an NDMC Kiosk close by which was sold out by the original allottee to another
person who keeps a variety of goods on the footpath and creates garbage all
around. The complainant also alleged
that the said persons abuses him and intimidates him. His daughter and son-in-law also used derogatory
language against the complainant. He
also alleged that the said person has the support of NDMC and the Police.
2. The
complaint was taken up with the respondents vide notice dated 13.05.2014
followed by 08.08.2014 and hearings on 01.07.2014, 30.10.2014, 19.11.2014, 19.01.2015,
23.02.2015, 30.03.2015, 29.04.2015, 30.06.2015, 30.07.2015, 01.09.2015,
01.10.2015, 02.11.2015, 23.05.16 and 29.07.2016.
3. Respondent
No. 1 submitted a copy of sealing MEMO dated 29.07.2015 issued to Sh. Harjeet
Singh Ahluwalia and Sh. Mohan Singh (unauthorised occupants of Kiosk No. 56,
Laxmibai Nagar). The complainant again alleged harassment by Sh. Satinder Bhati.
Thereafter the Respondent No. 1 was
directed to increase frequency of raids.
4. The
Office of Dy. Commissioner of Police, South District vide letter dated
15.11.2016 informed that the Investigating Officer of P.S. Sarojini Nagar
seized the articles of Mr. Neeraj Kumar and deposited the same into police
stations malkhana. Beat Constable has been
directed to keep the watch and hence no further action was required. A copy of the report of the Police was sent
to the complainant for his comments vide letter dated 09.01.2017. The complainant vide his letter received on
30.05.2017 inter alia stated that Sh. Satinder Bhati on one pretext or the
other tries to harass him.
5. A
copy of the complainant was also received from the office of Chief Commissioner
for Persons with Disabilities who had received an e-mail from Sh. Gajendra
Narayan Karna, regarding case.
6. It
is observed from the papers in the case file that Kiosk No. 56, at Laxmi Bai
Nagar Market, Near DMS Booth was seemingly allotted to Sh. Harjeet Singh who is stated to have
expired. The shop was being run by him
and one Sh. Mohan Singh under some agreement and thereafter by Sh. Satinder
Bhati. As per the report of the Office
of the Dy. Commissioner of Police, South District dated 22.11.2016, the said
kiosk was being used by Sh. Neeraj Kumar S/o of Sh. Satinder Bhati. It is however not clear from the available
papers in the file whether the current occupants of the said kiosk are the
legitimate lease holders or not.
7. During
the hearing on 28.08.2017, the complainant stated that neither Sh. Neeraj Kumar
nor his father Sh. Satinder Bhati is the authorised lease holder. Sh. Satinder Bhati, who according to him, is
a DDA employee, continues to sell goods from near his DMS booth and harasses
him besides adversely affecting his business.
8. The
representatives of the respondent submitted that they are from the Enforcement
Directorate and are responsible for removing any encroachment. Whenever they receive any complaint either
from the complainant or any other person, they remove encroachment as per rules.
This is a continuous practice. They offered to give the mobile number of the
concerned Area Inspector to the complainant who can inform him in case of any
encroachment. As regards harassment, the
complainant should report the matter to the police. They further submitted that the said kiosk
no. 56 was sealed and continues as such.
If any person including Sh. Satinder Bhati and Sh. Neeraj Kumar has
encroached unauthorisedly, the same will be removed immediately.
9. The
respondents are advised to ensure that the concerned persons as mentioned above
do not harass the complainant and adversely affect his livelihood by organising
regular vigil of the area. It is brought
to the notice of all concerned that Section 92 (a) of the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities Act, 2016 provides that,
“Whoever,—
(a)
intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a person with disability
in any place within public view shall be punishable with imprisonment for a
term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to five years
and with fine.” Section 89 of the said Act
also provides for “punishment for contravention of provisions of the said Act or Rules
or regulations made there under which may extend to ten thousand rupees and for
any subsequent contravention with fine which shall not be less than fifty
thousand rupees but which may extend to five lakh rupees.” Further, as per Section 7 (4) of the
Act, Any
police officer who receives a complaint or otherwise comes to know of abuse,
violence or exploitation towards any person with disability shall inform the
aggrieved person of—(a) his or
her right to apply for protection under sub-section (2) and the particulars of the Executive Magistrate having
jurisdiction to provide assistance among other things to ensure that the person
with disability is protected from abuse, violence and exploitation.
10. The
complainant is advised to approach the concerned Police Officials in case of
any harassment. The concerned Police
Officers are advised to ensure that the complainant is not harassed by any
person and his rights are not infringed.
11. During
the last over 3 years, this Court has taken various steps to redress the
grievance of the complainant. The
concerned authorities namely, NDMC and the Delhi Police have taken action in
accordance with the law and have undertaken to take measures under the relevant
provisions of the Act so that the complainant is not harassed. In the light of this and with above advice,
the complaint is disposed of.
12. Given under my hand and the seal of the
Court this 8th day of September, 2017.
(T.D. Dhariyal)
State Commissioner for
Persons with Disabilities
Copy
to:
The Chief
Commissioner of Persons with Disability w.r.t. case No. 6328/1141/2016 dated
04.08.2017.
No comments:
Post a Comment