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. 4/1605/2017-Wel/CD/3318-19 Dated: 08.12.2017
In
the matter of:
Sh. Ravindra Mohan Gupta,
Secretary, Association of Ex.Student of Lady
Noyce Deaf School,
Flat No. 4/20, Starlite Apartment,
Sector-14 Extnsion, Near Rohini Court,
Rohini, New Delhi-110085. .………
Complainant
Versus
The Director,
Directorate of Social Welfare
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
GLNS Complex, Delhi Gate,
New Delhi-110002. …...…Respondent
Date of hearing:
23.10.2017, 05.12.2017
Present Sh. Ravindra Mohan
Gupta, Complainant.
Sh. Rukhsar Ahmad
Khan, Assistant Director, Estate on behalf of Respondent.
ORDER
The above named complainant vide his
complaint dated 13.01.2017 received through the Court of Chief Commissioner for
the Persons with Disabilities vide their letter dated 28.04.2017 submitted that
the respondent Department had not vacated the premises of Lady Noyce School for
the Deaf, Delhi Gate despite the fact that the Court of Chief Commissioner had
forwarded their earlier representations dated 16.05.2013 and 10.06.2013 to the
Social Welfare Department. They had also
not received any comments/response/information and therefore, the complainant requested
to take strong steps to remove the unauthorised occupation.
2. The complaint was taken up vide communication
dated 31.05.2017 with the respondent who vide letter dated 21.06.2017 submitted
as under:
“The
Department of Social Welfare has been making its sincere efforts towards
amelioration of downtrodden and marginalized section of society through various
institutions, scheme and services.
Persons affected with Deafness are always on priority and therefore for
their specific needs following institutions have been established by the
Department-
Details of School/Institution
established by the Department of Social Welfare for Deaf:
|
Sl.
No.
|
Name
of the School Institutions with year of establishment
|
Sanctioned
Capacity
|
If
transferred or relocated to new location than date and address
|
|
1.
|
GLNS
for Deaf
1959
|
550
|
Primary
& Pre Primary School classes transferred to Nehru Vihar Delhi-54 on dated
16.07.2011
|
|
2.
|
NPS
for Deaf
1981
|
100
|
Transferred
from GLNS to Mayur Vihar Phase-I in the year 2002
|
|
3.
|
School
for Mentally Retarded Children 1981
|
50
|
Transferred
from GLNS to Mayur Vihar Phase-I in the year 2002
|
|
4.
|
NPS
for Deaf, Kalkaji 1987
|
100
|
|
|
5.
|
Govt.
NPS for Deaf(Sewa Kutir) 1987
|
100
|
Transferred
from Sewa Kutir to Rohini on dated 23.04.2001
|
|
6.
|
NPS
for Deaf Nehru Vihar transferred from GLNS on 16.07.2011
|
250
|
Primary
& Pre Primary School classes transferred from GLNS to Nehru Vihar,
Delhi-54 on dated 16.07.2011
|
It is quite evident from the above
information that the Govt. Lady Noyce School for the Deaf was established with
separate Hostel facilities or Boys and Girls in the year 1959 with the capacity
of 550 students. Further in the year
1981 Nursery Primary School for Deaf and School for Mentally Retarded Children
were started in the GLNS Complex.
Alleging
that Department of Social Welfare has occupied the GLNS building at Delhi Gate
is not correct. It will be surely
appreciated that Govt. Lady Noyce School is not a separate entity but a part of
Department of Social Welfare. Department
is very sensitive and do understand the specific needs of Deaf and therefore
for smooth functioning of Govt. Lady Noyce School, department has established
aforesaid schools at different locations for the convenience of deaf children
so that they should not commute long distance.”
3. The
matter was thereafter heard on 23.10.2017.
During the hearing, the complainant vehemently contented that the
premises of the Govt. Lady Noyce School, GLNS Complex, Delhi Gate belongs to the
school and not to the Social Welfare Department. Some of the reasons why the Social Welfare
Department should shift from the said premises, as highlighted by him, are as
under:-
(i) Occupation of a substantial
area by the Social Welfare Department leaves little space for the students with
hearing impairment for classes, play and other extra-curricular
activities. The school is forced to
teach 45-50 students in one class while the prescribed pupil - teacher ratio
should be 8 to 1.
(ii) Because of the movement of
visitors/officials in the Office of Social Welfare Department, there are issues
of security. It also distracts the
attention of the students from studies.
(iii)
The ambience of the school
environment itself gets destroyed because of the presence of large number of
persons and activities in the office premises.
(iv) The academic and life skills
learning of the children with hearing impairment who have been shifted to Nehru
Vihar gets affected adversely.
4. The
Principal of the school also supported the above grounds for shifting the Social
Welfare Department from the GLNS Complex.
5. The complainant further submitted that the Department has been promising to
vacate the premises for many years but they have neither been given any
assurance in writing nor the premises has been vacated. This, according to him, has infringed the
rights of children with hearing impairment for whom the said land and building
was donated by Lady Noyce.
6. Department
of Social Welfare was advised to find a solution to the issue keeping in mind
the needs and rights of children with
hearing impairment for whom the
institution has been set up and a report be submitted by 30.11.2017.
7. On
the next date of hearing on 05.12.2017, a copy of the letter dated 22.11.2017
submitted by Dy. Director (Estate), Department of Social Welfare was handed
over to the complainant to enable him to respond. The contents of the said letter are identical
to the letter dated 16.02.2017 addressed to the complainant and the letter
dated 21.06.2017 addressed to this court.
The respondent Department has contended that Govt. Lady Noyce School is
not a separate entity but a part of Social Welfare Department and that the Department
is very sensitive and does understand specific needs of persons with deafness. It has further been stated that other issues
mentioned in the Record of Proceedings dated 23.10.2017 are administrative in
nature and are being considered at administrative level in the Social Welfare
Department.
8. The
representative of the respondent explained the process of allotment of land in
Delhi and stated that Social Welfare Department does not have its own land pool.
9. The
complainant reiterated his written submissions as summarised in the Record of
Proceedings dated 27.10.2017. He strongly
felt that the presence of the offices of Social Welfare Department within the
Campus of the school does affect the academic environment which should be appreciated
in the right perspective by the concerned authorities. Similarly, the distance that the children
need to travel to Nehru Vihar from the hostel at Delhi Gate also adversely
effects the education of the smaller children of primary section.
10. The
complainant reiterated that the land was donated by Lady Noyce for education of
children with deafness and not for using it for any other purpose much less for
setting up the administrative offices. Therefore,
such an arrangement should not be allowed to continue for indefinite period. He believes that the suggestion to shift the
Social Welfare Department to Nehru Vihar building and to shift the deaf
children to Govt. Lady Noyce School, Delhi Gate is the most practical solution
in the current circumstances where, as per the Department, it does not have any
other space/building to shift. He
however, mentioned that 1 Canning Lane, from where the Department of Social
Welfare was earlier functioning, would be more appropriate and convenient, as
it is centrally located. At this point
the representation of the respondent clarified that the premises at 1 Canning
Lane is presently occupied by Women and Child Department and it does not belong
to Social Welfare Department.
11. When
the complainant was asked whether he/the organisation ever approached the
concerned authorities such as Secretary/Director, Social Welfare, he stated
that he and other representatives of the organisation did meet various functionaries
of the Department but it has always been a problem understanding the conversation
due to unavailability of Sign Language Interpreter during the meetings.
12. In
the facts and circumstances of this case and upon going through the submissions
of the parties. It is felt that the
issues concerning the quality education of children with deafness in a mixed
environment need to be addressed professionally and urgently. The issues pertaining to teacher pupil ratio,
the commuting distance impacting the education and well being of young children,
congenial learning environment in the school should be addressed and decided by
the Department of Social Welfare on the recommendation of an expert committee
comprising at least three professionals in education of children with hearing
impairment. One of the expert
professionals should be the nominee of Ali Yavar Jung National Institute of Speech
and Hearing Disabilities, Department of Empowerment of Persons with
Disabilities and none of the Committee members should be a member/employee of
an organisation that is in receipt of any grant-in-aid from Social Welfare
Department. While giving its recommendations,
the Committee shall ensure that interests of the children and their education
remain paramount. The decision taken in
the matter be intimated to this Court within 3 months from the date of receipt
of this order under intimation to the complainant as required u/s. 81 of the
Rights of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
13. As
regards the allegation of illegal occupation of the premises by the Department,
the complainant has not submitted any supporting documents. In any case, State Commissioner is not the
appropriate forum for resolution of such matter.
14. Although
it is not the subject matter of this complainant, it will be in the fitness of
things for me to take note of the statement of the complainant during the
course of hearing about the difficulty he faced in communicating with the
officials in the absence of Sign Language Interpreters. I, therefore, advise the respondent Department
to ensure availability of sign language interpreter whenever there is a
meeting, conference, workshop, training in which persons with deafness are the participants. It is also recommended that a pool of Sign
Language Interpreters be created whose contact details should be available in
the website of the Department to facilitate availing of their services as and
when required. Appropriate directions
should also be issued to all the Departments/ Organisations/ local bodies in the
NCT of Delhi to ensure Sign Language Interpretation services in all the
meetings, conferences, workshops, training which are attended by persons with
hearing impairment and at Reception Counters etc. Assistance of Indian Sign Language Research and
Training Centre functioning under the Department of Empowerment of Persons with
Disabilities, Govt. of India may be sought, if necessary. Action taken in this regard also be intimated
to this Court within 3 months of receipt of this order.
13. The complaint is disposed off accordingly
14. Given under my hand and the seal of the
Court this 8th day of December, 2017.
(T.D. Dhariyal)
State Commissioner for Persons
with Disabilities
