Suo Motu Vs. The Pr. Secretary, General Admin Department, Delhi | Case No. 3007/1015/2021/08/3220 | Dated: 23-11-2021

 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-110002

Phone: 011-23216003-04, Telefax: 011-23216005, Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in

[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016]

________________________________________________________________________________

Case No. 3007/1015/2021/08/3220                       Dated: 23-11-21

In the matter of:

Suo-motu                                       ……..Complainant

Versus

The Pr. Secretary,
General Administration Department,
Delhi Secretariat, I.P. Estate,
Delhi-110002                          ……..Respondent

ORDER

As per Section 21 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (The Act), “(i) Every establishment shall notify equal opportunity policy detailing measures proposed to be taken by it in pursuance of the provisions of this Chapter in the manner as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (2) Every establishment shall register a copy of the said policy with the Chief Commissioner or the State Commissioner, as the case may be.”

2. Rule 8 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017(RPwD Rules) & Rule 12 of the Delhi Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2018(Delhi RPwD Rules), provide as under:

 “Manner of publication of equal opportunity policy.- 

(1) Every establishment shall publish equal opportunity policy for persons with disabilities within a period of six months from the notification of these rules.  

(2) The establishment shall display the equal opportunity policy preferably on their website, failing which, at conspicuous places in their premises. 

(3)  The equal opportunity policy of a private establishment having twenty or more employees and the Government establishments shall inter alia, contain the following, namely:- 

(a) Facilities and amenities to be provided to the persons with disabilities to enable them to effectively discharge their duties in the establishment; 

(b) list of posts identified suitable for persons with disabilities in the establishment;  

(c) the manner of selection of persons with disabilities for various posts, post-recruitment and pre-promotion training,  preference in transfer and posting, special leave, preference in allotment of residential accommodation if any, and other facilities; 

(d) provisions for assistive devices, barrier-free accessibility and other provisions for persons with disabilities;

(e) appointment of liaison officer by the establishment to look after the recruitment of persons with disabilities and provisions of facilities and amenities for such employees. 

(4)  The equal opportunity policy of the private   establishment having less than twenty employees shall contain facilities and amenities to be provided to the persons with disabilities to enable them to effectively discharge their duties in the establishment.” 

3. Vide  letter No.F.5/1766/2017-wel/CD/5134- 5292 dated13.02.2018 followed by reminders dated 15.06.2018 and 18.01.2019, the respondent was advised as under:

(i) to have the Equal Opportunity Policy(EOP) in respect of their Department/Organisation and the establishments under their control, published and registered with the State Commissioner; and 

(ii) provide a list of private establishments registered with or connected to their department/organisation alongwith their full addresses and contact details in soft copy;

4.    As per the Public Notice published in the Times of India dated24.11.2019 (copy enclosed), all the Govt. Establishments and the Private Establishments, covered under the Act and had not framed their EOPs were directed through this public notice to frame and register their EOPs with this office.

5.    As  there  was  no  response  from the respondent, the respondent was directed to show cause why the equal opportunity policy in respect of his/her Department and all the establishments (Govt. as well as private establishments) registered or connected to his/her Department should not be notified and registered with the State Commissioner vide notice dated 03.08.2021.

6.    The respondent vide letter dated23.10.2021  has submitted the copy of EOP in respect of the General Administration Department, GNCT of Delhi for registration. The said EOP has been registered with registrations No. EOP/DL/Discom/117/2021. 

7.    The matter is disposed off.

8.    Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 23rd November, 2021.

(Ranjan Mukherjee)

                              State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities

Preeti Agarwal Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, South West District | Case No.2337/1111/2021/08/3158-3160 | Date: 09-11-2021

 In the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities

National Capital Territory of Delhi

25-D, Mata Sundri Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-110002

Phone: 011-23216003-04, Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in

[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the 

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016]

Case No.2337/1111/2021/08/3158-3160                      Dated:09-11-21

In the matter of:

Ms. Preeti Agarwal,
U-12, First Floor, Green Park Main,
New Delhi-110016.
(Email: namaste.preeti@gmail.com)                    …………Complainant

Versus

The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
South West District,
Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi-110057.                               ………..Respondent 

Date of Hearing : 08.11.2021

Present : Ms. Preeti Agarwal, Complainant

Sh. Vikram Lamba, SI, PS Safdarjung Enclave, on behalf of respondent

ORDER

Ms. Preeti Agarwal, the above named complainant, a person with 90% hearing impaired filed a complaint dated 09.08.2021, forwarded from the Office of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities vide email dated 23.08.2021, under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016, hereinafter referred to as the Act, regarding harassment by neighbor Sh. Pankaj Gandhi, resident of U-12, Ground Floor, Green Park Main, New Delhi-110016.

2. The matter was taken up with DCP, South District vide letter dated 26.08.2021. Complainant vide letter dated 03.09.2021, submitted that the Inquiry Officer SI Vikram Lamba came to her house and told her to give a letter stating that the problem has been resolved, which she refused. As they were locked from outside by their downstairs neighbour Mr. Pankaj Gandhi which was duly captured in the CCTV camera yet, there was no action taken by Police against such inhuman and criminal activities of Mr. Pankaj Gandhi, which bothered them and that’s why she requested the police authorities to prevent any such harassment in future.  

3. The matter was again taken up with the DCP, South District vide reminder dated 06.09.2021 which was forwarded to the office of DCP, South West District vide their letter dated 22.09.2021.  Respondent vide reply dated 06.10.2021 submitted that an enquiry was conducted in the case and it was found that the matter was a petty issue between the neighbours.  No cognizable offence was made out and hence the complaint was filed.

4. Complainant vide rejoinder dated 13.10.2021 strongly protested against the subject of the letter from the Police, and contested the same.

5. A hearing was scheduled on 08.11.2021. During the hearing, complainant reiterated her submissions and stated that locking up two hearing impaired women from outside was not a petty issue.  The same was case of criminal intimidation and an atmosphere of fear for them. She further submitted that she got no apology or assurance that no such intimidation/ harassment would happen in future. She also objected to the action of the concerned SI insisting on signing of letter for reconciliation in the matter. 

6. The representative of the respondent submitted that he visited the premises of the complainant and directed both the parties to maintain peace in future. The Court took serious concern on the action taken by the concerned SI. 

7. After taking due cognizance of submissions made by the complainant & the respondent, the Court recommended the following:

(i) First of all, Court takes objection to sending a relatively junior officer of the rank of Sub Inspector during the hearing which was duly brought to the notice of area DCP and should not be repeated.

(ii) The reply furnished by the representative of respondent was not acceptable wherein he tried to project that it is a mere altercation between two neighbours and the Court hereby orders the local police to deal such cases of intimidation against PwDs with due care respect and regard specially to the disabled ladies, who are being regularly harassed by the neighbours from downstairs and issue warning to them.  They should be asked to refrain from such uncivilized behaviour and activities, failing which necessary action as per the law and RPwD Act, 2016 should be initiated. 

(iii) Sh. Vikram Lamba, SI was directed to personally look into this matter seriously and assure that the complainant and her sister were not intmidated or humilated by anyone. 

8. The complainant was asked to feel free to contact the Office of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (SCPD) in case of repetition of such activities by her neighbours. 

9. The matter is disposed with the above recommendations.

10. Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 08th day of November, 2021. 

 

(Ranjan Mukherjee)

               State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities

Note: 

SHO of the Area Police Station (Safdarjung Enclave), Sh. Shalender Tomar did come and meet SCPD later. He assured that the case would be looked into and resolved in the correct perspective as per advice of the court. He also requested for sensitisation of the Police personnel of the area to which SCPD agreed to do the needful. 

Copy to:

The Commissioner of Police, New Delhi, Police Headquarters, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001.