The website contains all the orders and judgements passed by the Court of the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, Delhi starting March 2017.
Showing posts with label Accessibility in Residential Colonies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Accessibility in Residential Colonies. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 19, 2018
Saturday, December 23, 2017
Dinesh Singh Negi Vs. President, Raj Vihar CGHS & 3 Ors | Case No. 4/1185/2016-Wel/CD/3494-98 | Dated: 22.12.2017
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.
4/1185/2016-Wel/CD/3494-98 Dated:
22.12.2017
In the matter of:
Sh. Dinesh Singh Negi
Flat No-24, Rah Vihar,CGHS,
Plot. No-13, Sector-18A,
Dwarka, New Delhi -110078. ..............Complainant
Versus
The President Registrar
Co-operative Societies,
Raj Vihar, CGHS GNCT
of Delhi,
Plot no.-13, Sector-18A Paliament
Street, New Delhi -110001
Dwarka, New Delhi -78 ......Respondent 1.
..........Respondent 2.
The Vice Chairman The
Commissioner
DDA, B-Block, Ist Floor, South
Delhi Municipal Corpn.
Vikas Sadan, Near INA Market 9th
Floor, Dr. S.P.M. Civic Centre
New Delhi – 110023. ........Respondent
3. JLN Marg, New Delhi -110002.
........Respondent 4
Date of Hearing: 30.11.2017
Present: Counsel
for DDA, Adv. Renu Gautam Sharma
ORDER
The above named complainant vide his
complaint dated 09.02.2016 submitted that his elder daughter is suffering from
mental retardation. He requested Raj Vihar CGHS, Sector -18 A, Dwarka, Delhi to
ensure the free passage from lift to the open parking, if necessary, by
vacating the parking area allotted by the society in the common passage
area. That was necessary for free access
/movement of vehicles in case of emergency.
However, the President of the society did not care even to answer the
communication. The complainant therefore
requested to direct the President of the Society/appropriate authority to
ensure free passage from lift to open parking.
2. The complaint was taken up with the Registrar,
Cooperative Society vide letter dated 25.02.2016 followed by reminder dated
07.04.2016, 08.11.2016 and 30.11.2016.
3. The Registrar, Cooperative Society vide
letter dated 29.11.2016 advised the Ex-President and Secretary of the Raj Vihar
CGHS to take appropriate action and file Action Taken Report before this court
since DDA was the authority for amendment of building bye- laws. Despite repeated reminders the President and
Secretary of the Society did not respond.
4. The complainant vide his letter dated
03.03.2017informed that the then President had expired and fresh managing
committee had been elected. Since he had
been elected as Secretary of the Society, he would like to disassociate himself
from the role of finding solution as Secretary of Managing Committee. Vice Chairman, DDA was impleaded as
respondent No. 3 and a hearing was scheduled on 05.06.2017. While the complainant and the President of
the Society appeared, Registrar, Cooperative Society and DDA were not
represented.
5. The
Complainant reiterated in his written submission and added that his 11 year old
daughter is a person with mental retardation and has a history of
epilepsy. The car parking lots 5 and 10
in the stilt area in front of exit from the lifts have been shown as parking
lots by DDA in its parking plan of the society dated 08.07.2010 apparently due
to over sight or mistake as the circulation area plan of DDA of the same date
shows the area as the circulation area.
The said lots can also not be earmarked as parking lots as those
obstruct the movement to the arterial road in the society. Due to the parked cars at those lots, it is
not possible for the ambulance to go close to the lift to enable his daughter
to board the ambulance. Copies of the
parking plan and the circulation plan for the said society submitted by the
complainant were enclosed for DDA’s reference.
He further submitted that the society has allotted 18 covered parking
lots instead of 16 and the former President had allotted one of the said
parking spaces to Sh. Arvind S. Gulati on temporary basis which was not
proper.
6. Sh. J.K. Batheja, the President of Raj
Vihar Society submitted that car par kings have been allotted as per the
sanctioned drawings by DDA. If those
parking lots are removed from the drawing or directions are received from the
appropriate authority namely DDA, the Society can at present accommodate the allottees
of car parking lots 5 and 10.
7. It was observed from the submissions of
parties that DDA needed to clarify whether the contention of the complainant
with respect to car parking lot no. 05 and 10 was right and if so, then DDA
should issue appropriate direction to the President of Raj Vihar CGHS Ltd. for
clearing the circulation area within 30 days from the date of receipt of the
proceedings. The Managing Committee of
the society was also advised to take appropriate action to resolve the matter
within 30 days from the date of receipt of the clarification/directions from
DDA and intimate the decision taken to the complainant and this court within a
week thereafter. In case of any dispute
or difficulty in resolving the matter, the President of the Society was
directed to approach Registrar Cooperative Societies, GNCTD, who was advised to
make efforts to resolve the issue and intimate this court within 15 days from
the date the President of the Society approached him/her. DDA was further advised as to how barrier
free movement and access from the lift could be ensured for the daughter of the
complainant particularly in case of emergency, if parking lots No. 5 and 10
have indeed been indicated correctly in the parking plan.
8. On the next date of hearing on
01.09.2017, the learned counsel for respondent no. 3 DDA submitted that the
area in which the Raj Vihar, CGHS is
located, has been de-notified and the building activities have been handed over
to South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC).
Therefore, any decision about the construction etc. can be done with the
approval of SDMC. However, as the Delhi
Development Authority (DDA) had approved the drawings and the case involved a
person with disability, DDA examined the matter and was in the process of
suggesting some feasible solution. She
sought two week’s time to submit the written submissions which would contain
the proposed solution based on examination of the Building Department. She also explained the possible ways to
provide access for Ambulance and the cars to the lifts in case of emergency.
However, as DDA was not the authority to approve any amendment / modification,
that was only a suggestion to be implemented by the Management Committee of the
society with the approval of the local authority i.e. the SDMC.
9. The representative of Registrar
Co-operative Societies, the respondent No.2 stated that although they have no
role with regard to the modifications / relocation of parking spaces, they
would instruct the society to sort out the matter.
10. The Authorised Representative of respondent
No. 1, the society stated that the suggestion of DDA appears to be feasible and
workable as that would be closer to the lift.
If the Management Committee issues a circular for removal of one parking
slot on each side of the lift core as no parking zone, the problem would get
resolved. Since that also happened to be
an alternative solution by DDA, its implementation should not be a problem.
11. The complainant submitted that if
suggested solution is implemented, a provision of shed would need to be made to
make it all weather friendly. This
should also not be in contravention of any bye-laws regulating the Fire Act,
National Disaster Management Act, etc.
12. In the light of the submissions of
respondent no.3 that SDMC would be the authority to approve any modification /
construction etc., Commissioner, South Delhi Municipal Corporation was impleaded
as respondent no. 4 and was advised to submit his / her comments on the
suggestions that the DDA may formally submit and the Corporation’s own suggestions
on the next date of hearing so that the complaint could be disposed of. Respondent No. 3 was advised to send a copy
of the suggestions to the Commissioner, South Delhi Municipal Corporation by
11.09.2017.
13. DDA vide their reply dated 15.09.2017
submitted as under: -
“1.
That the contents of para 1 of the complaint is matter of record. It is denied that the car parking lots 05 and
10 in the stilt area in front of exit from the lifts have been shown as parking
lots by DDA in it parking, plan of the society dated 08.07.2010 apparently due
to over sight or mistake as the circulation area. The said lots can also not be same date shows
the area as the circulation area. The
said lots can also not be earmarked as parking lots as those obstruct the movement
to the arterial road in the society. It
is submitted that the matter is regarding the Car parking shown as 05 and 10 in
the Stilt Area in front of exit from the lifts lobbies in r/o Raj Vihar CGHS
Ltd. at plot no. 13, Sector 18 A, Dwarka, New Delhi -110078. As per the approved Parking Plain of
Completion Drawing dated 08.07.2010, the ECS required/provided as prescribed in
MPD-2021 are as under: -
A. Total ECS required : 109.30
ECS
B. Total ECS provided in Open and Stilt : 128.08 ECS
I) Actual car space provided in Open = 68 Nos.
II) Actual car space provided in
Stilt = 16 Nos.
___________________________________________
Total =
84 Nos.
___________________________________________
The current UBBL-2016 has a chapter
11 dedicated for Provisions for Universal Design for Differently Abled, Elderly
and children. Copy of the guidelines
prescribed under law is annexed as Annexure –A.
2-3. That
the contents of para 2 and 3 of the complaint is matter of record. It is submitted that the area of Raj Vihar
CGHS Ltd. at Plot No. 13, Sector 18 A has already been denotified vide
Notification No. F.12 (47)/09/L&B/Plg.6412 dated 16.07.2010 (refer Annexure
B). The said area is now pertains to the
North MCD. Therefore, concerned MCD will
take action/direction in this case. The
concerned building file is still lying with DDA, Building section. The DDA has proposed two options immediately
as the matter is related to provide obstruction free movement from car parking
to Lift Lobby for differently abled persons which are as under. Copy of Notification is attached as
Annexure –B.
4. That
the contents of para 4 of the complaint cum proceedings is matter of
record. It is submitted that the matter
was fixed for 26.06.2017 for proceedings but unfortunately it was the holiday
due to Eid.
5. That the contents of para 5 of the
complaint is matter of record hence need no reply.
6. That
the contents of para 6 of the complaint is matter of record. It is submitted that the matter is regarding
the Car parking shown as 05 and 10 in the Stilt Area in front of exit from the
lifts lobbies in r/o Raj Vihar CGHS Ltd. at plot No.13, Sector-18 A, Dwarka,
New Delhi -110078. As per the approved
Parking Plain of Completion Drawing dated 08.07.2010, the ECS required/provided
as prescribed in MPD-2021 are as under:
A Total ECS required : 109.30
ECS
B. Total ECS provided in Open and
Stilt :
128.08 ECS
I) Actual car space provided in Open = 68 Nos.
II) Actual car space provided in
Stilt = 16 Nos.
___________________________________________
Total =
84 Nos.
___________________________________________
The current UBBL-2016 has a chapter
11 dedicated for Provisions for Universal Design for Differently Abled, Elderly
and children.
7. That
the contents of para 7 of the complaint is matter of record. It is submitted that the area of Raj Vihar
CGHS Ltd. at Plot No. 13, Sector 18 A has already been denotified vide
Notification No. F.12 (47)/09/L&B/Plg./6412 dated 16.07.2010 (refer
Annexure B). The said area is now
pertains to the North MCD. Therefore,
concerned MCD will take action/direction in this case. The concerned building file is still lying
with DDA, Building Section. The DDA has
proposed two options immediately as the matter is related to provide
obstruction free movement from car parking to Lift Lobby for differently abled
persons which are as under:
8. That
it is submitted that DDA has proposed two suggestions only. The actual dimensional barrier free
facilities as per UBBL-2016/relevant acts shall have to be designed as per site
conditions by the Architect appointed by the CGHS and revised drawings can be
sanctioned by the concerned local authority i.e. SDMC, Letter send to the
President Raj Vihar CGHS Ltd., Plot No. 13, Sector 18A, Dwarka, New Delhi -78
in which the suggestions were given to them vide letter No. F.23
(23)2001/Bldg/L&I/229 dt. 31.08.2017. Copy of letter is attached as Annexure
–C.
Suggestion can be
implemented to sort the issue and the options are as under:
Option 1: The MC of the Society
can accommodate dedicated Car parking at 2 places i.e. behind lifts well
structures on both the Housing Towers.
These two Car-parking Locations shall be negotiated through ramps from
Car parking to Lift Lobby level through the ramp enabling the wheel chair to
reach the lift lobby area. Coy of plan
is attached as Annexure-D.
Option 2: The car parking
location marked as 05 and 10 in both the blocks in stilt area may be abolished
to create obstruction free wheel chair movement from Car parking area to lift
lobby area as the society has 128.08 ECS against required 109 ECS.”
14. On the
next date of hearing on 25.10.2017, the representative of SDMC submitted status
report which is reproduced below;
“That the complainant
Sh. Dinesh Singh Negi was contacted in order to have first-hand knowledge of
the matter as well as the grievance to be redressed through the court of State
Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (NCT, Delhi). Sh. Dinesh Singh Negi informed that his child
is handicapped and is not keeping well and very frequently he has to call the
Ambulance for taking her to the hospital for the ailment. He further informed that the distance from
the lift to the place where the Ambulance is parked in the society is bit far;
as a result lot of inconvenience is faced by him to reach to the Ambulance for
taking the child to the hospital.
On the last date of hearing, DDA
brought forward some of the suggestions.
The complainant suggested that a provision of shed near to the lift
would need to be made to make the passage weather friendly and this exercise
shall also not be in contravention of any Bye-Laws regulating the Fire Act,
NDMA etc. Further, it was also opined
that the parking lot near the lift may be vacated or re-arranged and also if
deemed fit the fiber sheet/shed over the open space near the lift may be
provided to provide relief to the complainant.
However, SDMC has no
objection if the Management Committee issues a circular for removal of one
parking lot on each side of the lift core as no parking zone, the problem will
get resolved. Since, this also happens
to be an alternative solution by DDA; implementation should not be a problem.
Regarding erection of a shed near to
the lift, SDMC has no objection if it is within the ambit of Master Plan
-2021/Building-Bye-Laws.
Place: New Delhi
Dated: 25.10.2017
ASSISTANT ENGINEER (BLDG.)-III
NAJAFGARH ZONE (SDMC)”
15. During the hearing on 30.11.2017, Advocate
Renu Gautam Sharma, Ld. Counsel for DDA submitted that DDA has no role to play
as it has already suggested two options for implementation by MCD in the
society. She requested to discharge DDA
from the array of the respondent.
16. The complainant and the representatives of
Raj Vihar CGHS Ltd. did not appear, Sh. Jagdish Batheja, President, Raj Vihar
CGHS Ltd. vide his e-Mail dated 30.04.2017 informed that he was not able to
attend the hearing due to ill health and if postponement of the hearing is not
possible, he would arrange to send his written submissions. He was informed to submit the written
submissions and accordingly, vide his submission dated 04.12.2017 he informed
as under:
17. “The Managing Committee of the Society
can implement the first option given by the Engineers of the DDA –MCD in their
Status Report.
Option
1: he area behind the lift of both blocks is
to be utilised for dedicated ambulance parking as it is closely located to
vertical exits (stairs and lifts) from upper floors and also travelling
distance is just 5 to 10 metres from lifts and also in this area as per
building bye-laws both side of the lift have step less access for persons with
disabilities, sick person –using wheelchairs, Crutches, stretchers etc. This dedicated parking area for ambulance can
be covered with fibre shed to make it all weather friendly. It’s also not in contravention of any
bye-laws of any authority.
Option 2: The other
option suggested by DDA is to re-arrange covered parking lots which will not be
viable option as access area towards lift area is unlabelled and as gutter and
shafts of waste water. Further the
distance from the lifts is also almost 30-35 meters away. Henceforth, this
particular exit may not be safe for persons with disabilities, sick person, old
age or any patient.”
18. He has requested to go through his
observations and suggesting so that the Managing Committee can implement the
orders at the earliest.”
19. Sh. Batheja was requested to e-mail his
submission dated 04.12.2017 to the complainant vide this court’s e-mail dated
6.12.2017 and the complainant was advised to submit his comments, if any,
within 7 days of receipt of the submissions dated 04.12.2017 of Sh.
Batheja. Sh. Batheja sent the e-mail to
the complainant on 11.12.2017. Till date no comments have been received from
the complainant.
20. In
light of the above, the respondent No. 1 is advised to implement option-1 has
suggested by the society. All concerned
civic and other authorities involved are also advised to facilitate and accord
necessary approval on priority, so that the option is implemented within three
months from the date of receipt of this order.
Respondent No. 1 shall submit an Action Taken Report regarding
implementation of the said option within three months from the date of receipt
of this order with a copy to the complainant and other respondents for their
information.
21. The complaint is disposed off
accordingly.
22. Given under my hand and the seal of the
Court this 22nd day of December, 2017.
(T.D. DHARIYAL)
Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)