Thursday, March 8, 2018

Kamal Kant Vs. CEO BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd & Anr | Case No. 4/1012/2015-Wel/CD/5954-56 | Dated: 07.03.2018


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
Phone-011-23216002-04, 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. 4/1012/2015-Wel/CD/5954-56                                   Dated: 07.03.2018

In the matter of:

Sh. Kamal Kant
S/o Sh. Ram Sewak
H.No. 38, Near Chaupal
Saidullazab Opposite Saket
New Delhi -110030                                                                      .......Petitioner

Versus

The Chief Executive Officer
BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd.
BSES Bhawan, Nehru Place
Delhi -110019                                                                        ............Respondent No. 1

The Deputy Commissioner of Police
Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Police,
South District, Hauz Khas
New Delhi -110017                                                              ..............Respondent No. 2

Date of Hearing: 6.03.2018

Present: Sh. P. Bhaskar, Manager, BSES, Sh. Vivek Rathi, Legal Retainer, BSES

            ORDER

            The above named complainant, a person with 75% locomotor disability vide his complaint dated 5.06.2015 received from the court of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities vide letter dated 18.06.2015, inter-alia submitted that he is a 38 years old person with disability.  On the evening of 7.10.2013, the main electric line cable of BSES fell on him at Hauz Rani, Press Enclave, because of the negligence of the employees of BSES.  His left leg had to be amputated below knee.  Police also did not investigate the matter properly.  He requested that he should be rehabilitated and given appropriate compensation.

2.         The complaint was taken up with the respondents vide communication dated 24.06.2015. 

3.         Respondent No. 1 vide letter dated 7.7.2015 submitted that as per their record no such electrocution case of Sh. Kamal Kant occurred on 7.10.2013 at 7.30 p.m.  There was also no complaint relating to the electrocution.  The complainant filed FIR after 6 months of the alleged incidence.  Therefore, the complaint was false and fabricated.

4.         Upon considering the rejoinder of the complainant, hearings was held on 13.10.2015 and 10.11.2015, Respondent No. 2 vide letter dated 10.11.2015 submitted that during the investigation of the case, no eye-witness of the incidence was found.  BSES also informed that no conductor snapped on 7.10.2013 in that area.  The investigation was still in progress to trace any eye-witness of the incidence.

5.         As there was no further report, a hearing was scheduled on 06.03.2018.  Neither the complainant nor anyone on his behalf appeared during the hearing. The representatives of respondent No. 1 reiterated their submissions filed vide letter dated 7.7.2015 and also produced break-down status of 11 KV of Hauz Rani Press Enclave Road as per which there was no break down complaint.

6.         As per the letter dated 21.2.2018 filed by the Office of Dy. Commissioner of Police, South District, the investigation of the case FIR No. 227/14 dated 02.04.2014 under section 338 IPC registered at Police Station Saket, was completed in November, 2017 and an untraced report was filed in the court of ACMM (South), Saket Court.  The Hon”ble Court disposed off the said case vide order dated 18.12.2017 after the statement of the complainant. Respondent No. 2 also enclosed a copy of the said order.  In the said order, it is stated that as per the final report under section 173 CrPC filed by Inquiry Officer, no clue about the accused could be obtained despite efforts.  The Hon’ble Court accepted the untraced report and directed that the investigation be reopened as and when the clue with regard to the accused is obtained.

8.         In the light of the above, the complaint is closed and disposed of accordingly.

9.         Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this  06th day of March, 2018.

(T.D. Dhariyal)
                                      State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities





Tuesday, March 6, 2018

B.G. Sarkar Vs. The MS, Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences & Anr | Case No. 35/1141/2017/11/5904-09 | Dated: 05.03.2018




                  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
Phone-011-23216002-04, 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.  35/1141/2017/11/5904-09                                          Dated: 05.03.2018

In the matter of:

Mr. B.G. Sarkar
F/o Ms. Neeta Sarkar
D-370, Indra Park,
Najafgarh, Delhi -110043                                                         ..............Complainant
Versus

The Medical Superintendent
Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences
(IHBAS), GNCT of Delhi
Dilshad Garden,
New Delhi -110095                                                                   ............Respondent


Case No. 62/1121/2017/12/                                                                      Dated:

In the matter of:

Mr. B.G. Sarkar
F/o Ms. Neeta Sarkar
D-370, Indra Park,
Najafgarh, Delhi -110043                                                               ..............Complainant
Versus

The Medical Superintendent
Janakpuri Super Specialty Hospital
C-2/B, Janakpuri
New Delhi -110058                                                                            ............Respondent

Date of Hearing: 22.02.2018
Present: Sh. B.G. Sarkar, Dr. Kirti Sharma Sr. Resident (Psychiatry), IHBAS, Mohd. Shoaib, MRT, IHBAS

ORDER

In the above mentioned cases the complainant vide his complaint dated 6.11.2017 and 27.11.2018 alleged that his daughter, Ms. Neeta Sarkar, a person with mental illness was not administered proper treatment by the Doctors of IHBAS.  He also requested for issuance of a disability certificate for her due to neurological disorders by Janakpuri Super Specialty Hospital (JSSH).  The complaints were taken up with IHBAS vide notice dated 28.11.2017 and with JSSH vide notice dated 18.12.2017.

2.         IHBAS in case no. 35/1121/2017/11/ vide letter dated 18.12.2017 submitted,
“Ms. Neeta Sarkar was recently admitted in Department of Psychiatry as in-patient on 04.07.2017 for the management of her psychiatric illness, which exacerbated due to poor compliance/adherence to medications (As reported by Mr. B.G. Sarakar, father of patient, she was refusing to take medications at home).  She was provided appropriate medications during hospitalization and the psychiatric symptoms improved significantly during hospital stay.
            For the complaint of Headache associated with nausea she was managed as per the consultation taken from Department of Neurology, IHBAS on 31.07.2017, 01.08.2017 and 09.08.2017.  The diagnosis of Migraine with aura was made after due assessments and evaluations and the appropriate treatment was started.  She was discharged on 22.08.2017 subsequent to significant clinical improvement in her psychiatric as well as Neurological condition, with an advice to follow up in Neurology and Psychiatry OPD.  The relevant investigations like CT and MRI were done which were normal”.
The Janakpuri Super Specialty Hospital in case No. 62/1121/2017/12 vide their letter dated 30.12.2017 submitted Janakpuri Super Specialty Hospital is dedicated to issue Disability Certificate for residents of West Delhi as per Notification No. F.No. 82 (265)/AD-III/Amendment PwD Act/DSW/09/18340-358 dated 12.02.2104 which is enclosed herewith.  If any resident belongs to West Delhi, Janakpuri Super Specialty Hospital welcomes for disability certification.  As complainant is a resident of South West Delhi (copy of address enclosed) and it was advised to refer Notification No. F. No. 82(265)/AD-III/Amendment/PwD Act/DSW/09/18340-358 dated 12.02.2014 for allocation of her district of Delhi and respective hospital for issuing of Disability Certificate.”
3.         As the complainant was not satisfied with the replies in both the cases, a hearing was scheduled on 22.02.2018.

4.         During the hearing, the complainant reiterated his written submissions and added that it is practically impossible for him to take his daughter for psychiatric treatment to IHBAS which takes him about 4 hours to reach the hospital.  Similarly,  VMMC and Safdarjung Hospital which has been notified for issuing disability certificate for mental retardation/mental illness and other neurological disorders and cerebral palsy etc. in respect of residents of South –West District vide Department of Social Welfare Notification No. 82 (265)/AD-III/AmendmentPWD Act/DSW/09/18340-358 dated 12.02.2014 is also very inconvenient.  The disability certificate should be issued by the hospital where the patient is being treated.  In this case, his daughter should be issued disability certificate on account of neurological disorders by JSSH.

5.         The representatives of IHBAS explained the procedure for admission and treatment of a patient who is brought to the emergency.  In case of Neeta Sarkar, it was observed that as per the record maintained in her patient record file which was produced by them for perusal, on 4.07.2017, she was examined by Dr. Anita Sharma, Sr. Resident (Psychiatry) at 12.00 and was advised some medicines at 12.30 p.m. They also produced the original initial assessment recorded by Dr. Anita Sharma.   It is however, difficult to ascertain at this stage whether the examination or the treatment that was administered to Ms Neeta Sarkar was appropriate or not.  

6.         The complainant also submitted that it took lot of time to get the MRI report from IHBAS.  Director, IHBAS may look into this aspect and see if there is a need to modify the existing procedure.

7.         The issue of treatment of persons with mental illness or with other disabilities requiring specialised treatment and care and issuance of disability certificate in general and to Ms. Neeta Sarkar in particular, needs a proper examination and an in depth examination.  There is a need to reconsider allocation of the areas to various hospitals for assessment and certification of disabilities to make it most convenient to persons with disabilities and their families.  

8.         While examining the request of the complaint to issue a disability certificate due to neurological disorder to Ms. Neeta Sarkar, it was observed during the course of hearing that disability certificate for mental illness was issued by IHBAS on 3.11.2016 with the recommendation for reassessment of her disability after two years and the said certificate is valid upto 21.02.2018.  Thereafter, she was issued one more disability certificate on 29.01.2018 for 50% intellectual impairment which is valid upto 28.01.2020 as the condition is likely to improve.  Disability due to neurological disorder is yet to be assessed.

9.         As Ms. Neeta Sarkar is suffering from more than one disability, she should be assessed by a medical authority for multiple disability and should be issued a single certificate of disability in Form -VI prescribed for the purpose in the Rights for Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 notified by Ministry of Social Justice Empowerment, Department of Empowerment for Persons with Disabilities.  

10.  In light of the issues arising out of the cases at hand and the observation of this court during the course of handling other complaints, the following recommendations are made for implementation:
(i)         Department of Health and Family Welfare is advised to convene a medical authority at JSS to assess and issue a certificate of multiple disability in respect of Ms. Neeta Sarkar in Form-VI within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
(ii)        Residents of many localities are not able to identify their district and the nominated hospital.  It is often very confusing even for this court to guide them properly.  Some areas/districts have more than two nominated hospitals. Therefore, a person should have the choice to get the assessment and disability certificate from the nearest notified hospital from his /her residence (not necessarily from the place of permanent address)
(iii)       A map demarcating the areas falling under the jurisdiction of a nominated hospital should be uploaded in the websites of Department of Health and Family Welfare, Department of Social Welfare and every nominated hospital.  Necessary instructions in this regard to the concerned hospitals may be issued.
(iv)       In case of shortage of specialists, medical authorities for multiple disability may comprise doctors/experts from other hospital(s) who may assemble at one hospital on given dates for assessment of certification.   
(v)        Provision for link specialist from the same or other hospital in case of unavailability of a specialist should be made.
(vi)       Camps in each district should be organised regularly till all the persons with Disabilities have been issued the disability certificates.
(vii)      Clear instructions should be issued /mentioned in the notification   that the treating hospital shall issue the disability certificate if the person is under treatment for the condition.
11.      A copy of this order is being marked to Pr. Secretary (Health and Family Welfare), Government of NCT of Delhi to consider the above recommendations and submit an action taken report to this court within three months from the date of receipt of this order as required under Section 81 of the Act.

12.       The complaints are disposed off.    
   
13.       Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 05th day of March, 2018.

Encl: As above                                                                            
(T.D. Dhariyal)
                                      State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
Copy to:
1.         Principal Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, GNCT of Delhi for action on the recommendations in para 10 of the order.
2.         Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, GNCT of Delhi for information and necessary action.
 

Sh. Ram Naul Tyagi Vs. Directorate of Economics & Statistics | Case No. 4/1098/2015-Wel-CD/5893-95 | Dated: 05.03.2018

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
Phone-011-23216002-04, 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.  4/1098/2015-Wel-CD/5893-95                                  Dated: 05.03.2018

In the matter of:

Sh. Ram Naul Tyagi
Retired Head Clerk
R/O H.No. 286, Gali Mangal Bazar
Vill. Post Burai, Delhi -110084                                         ...............Petitioner
Versus
The Director
Directorate of Economics & Statistics
GNCT of Delhi
3rd Floor, B-Block, Vikas Bhawan –II
Near Metcalf House, New Delhi -110054                        ...................Respondent

ORDER

            Sh. Ram Naul Tyagi, a person with blindness vide his representation addressed to Pr. Secretary (Planning) forwarded with his e.Mail dated 02.09.2017 alleged harassment by Dy. Director, Dr. Shikha Anand, HOO, DES.  The complainant submitted that he was working as UDC in the Directorate of Economics and Statistics. Dr. Shikha Anand, DD and Head of Office shouted and rebuked him on 18.02.2015 and 18.02.2016.  She used derogatory language about his disability.  She also frequently taunted him that his disability certificate was fake.  The other issue was about rejection of his travel claim by Dr. Anand despite the fact that journey had been verified by the Office Superintendent.  A complaint dated 22.12.2015 along with a letter dated 07.01.2016 of Association for Rights for Disabled Persons addressed to Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities was also received from the court of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities vide letter dated 29.02.2016.  It has been stated therein that Dr. Shikha Anand was selected for the post of Director in the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, though a case was pending against her in the court of Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, Government of NCT of Delhi.  The said complaint was also forwarded to the respondent vide communication dated 03.06. 2016.

2.         The complaint was taken up with the respondent vide communication dated 8.9.2015. 

3.         The respondent vide letter dated 23.09.2015 informed that a committee of Sh. D.B. Gupta, DD and Shaan-E-Alam AD of Directorate of Economic Services was constituted to go through the complaint.  The Committee submitted a preliminary fact finding report dated 21.09.2015.  As per the report, the allegation regarding misbehaviour by Dr. Shikha Anand was not proved as the complainant could not provide any proof.  Head of Office in turn alleged that the complainant had misbehaved with her on several occasions and used foul language.  However, keeping in view the dignity of the post and the age of the petitioner and to keep office atmosphere cordial, she only informed the Head of Department and did not issue any Memo to him.  As regards his transport/conveyance bills, Dr. Shikha Anand, Head of Office had personally instructed the complainant to use the official vehicle instead of auto for outdoor duty.  Hence she refused to clear the said bill, though the Office Superintendent had verified the bill.  After receipt of the complaint, the Head of Department instructed that the complainant may not be assigned any outdoor duty. 

4.         A hearing was held on 20.06.2016. The complainant requested for an independent enquiry.  It was observed that preliminary enquiry did not record the statement of the complainant and the persons present in the office during the incident.  The respondent was directed to make the payment of conveyance bills vide ROPs dated 23.06.2016. 

5.         In compliance, the respondent directed Sh. D.B. Gupta, DD and Sh. Shan-E-Alam, the then Asstt. Director to furnish the supplementary report vide Office order dated 6.7.2016.  The complainant was also asked to submit the names of the persons present in the office during the incidence vide letter dated 13.07.2017.  After reminders the complainant vide his letter dated 19.08.2106 intimated that Sh. Santosh Kumar, LDC of Caretaking Unit was present at the time of the incident. 

6.         The respondent vide letter dated 6.09.2016 submitted a fact finding report alongwith the statement of Sh. Santosh Kumar, LDC and answer to the questions asked by the Committee.  The contents of the said letter are reproduced below:

Sub:  Supplementary Fact Finding Report regarding harassment case against Dr. Shikha Anand (Ex-Dy. Director/HOO) filed by Sh. R.N. Tyagi (Retired Head Clerk) before the court of Commissioner for Persons with Disability, GNCTD.
Ref. Case No. 4/1098/2015-Wel/CD/481-82, dated 23.06.2016.
It is stated that a fact finding committee consisting of Sh. D.B. Gupta, Dy. Director, Planning Department and Sh. Shan-E-Alam, Dy. Director, DES is constituted in the above said matter to furnish supplementary report, Sh. R.N. Tyagi, (Retired Head Clerk)had been asked to submit the names of the persons who were present at the time of incident reported by him vide this office letter dated 13.07.2016.
Sh. R.N. Tyagi appeared personally before Sh. Shan-E-Alam, Dy. Director and expressed his wish to settle the matter with the mutual consent.  Accordingly, it was conveyed to Dr. Shikha Anand, Director, DGET, M/o Labour & Employment, Government of India.  It was decided to hold a meeting on mutually agreed date and time i.e. on 28.07.2016 at 4,00 p.m. in the DES.  Dr. Shikha Anand attended the meeting, however, Sh. R.N. Tyagi could not attend the meeting and also switched off his mobile during the scheduled time of the meeting. 
A letter dated 12.08.2016 was again sent to Sh. R.N. Tyagi requesting him to submit the names of the persons present in the office during the incident reported by him in his complaint.
Sh. R.N. Tyagi submitted name of Sh. R.N. Tyagi requesting him to submit the names of the persons present in the office during the incident vide his letter dated 19.08.2016.  Further vide letter dated 24.08.2016, the committee requested to the said witness to present at a hearing regarding this incident on 26.08.2016 at 4.30 PM in the room of Sh. D.B. Gupta, Dy. Director, Planning Department, 6th Level, B-Wing, Delhi Secretariat, I.P. Estate, New Delhi.
Sh. Santosh Kumar attended for hearing on the prescribed date and time and a statement in writing was submitted by him which is enclosed herewith for kind perusal.  Further, the committee have also asked some relevant questions to Sh. Santosh Kumar, LDC and his answers to the questions given in his own handwriting is also enclosed herewith for kind perusal.  On the basis of testimony of Sh. Santosh Kumar, LDC in the present case, this Committee has arrived at the opinion that allegations made by Sh. R.N. Tyagi in his complaint is not supporting the version of the complainant.
(D.B. GUPTA)
DY. DIRECTR (PLANNING)
(SHAN-E-ALAM)
DY. DIRECTOR, DES

7.         The respondent also informed that the payment of conveyance bills amounting to Rs. 510/- had been made. 

8.         Vide his letter dated 15.01.2018 the complainant alleged that the supplementary inquiry was conducted by the subordinates of Dr. Shikha Anand and requested to dismiss the fact finding report submitted by them.  He also alleged that neither the complainant was called nor his statement was recorded and the report which was based on the statement of Sh. Santosh Kumar, LDC, was not forwarded to him.  A hearing was therefore scheduled on 22.02.2108.

9.         During the hearing the complainant reiterated, that the two officers who conducted the enquiry were biased against him and therefore, enquiry should be conducted by an outside agency.  Dr. Shikha Anand, who is a Director in DGET, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, should be called and interrogated. 

10.       The representatives of the respondent submitted that the enquiry report is based on the written statement of Sh. Santosh Kumar, LDC who was identified as a witness by the complainant himself.  Hence, the report is based on facts.  Since, the conveyance amount has also been paid to the complainant, the case should be closed. 

11.       Subsequently, the complainant requested to inspect the case file and to see the statement of Sh. Santosh Kumar as he suspected that his statement may have been modified.  The complainant was informed that he could inspect the papers contained in the file on any working day.   Sh. Santosh Kumar visited this court on 27.02.2018 at 3.45 p.m.  He was shown his written statement dated 26.08.2016 and answers to the questions given to him by the Enquiry Committee.  He confirmed that the said statement and answers were indeed written by him and there was no pressure of any kind to make the statement.  He reconfirmed that Dr. Shikha Anand did tell him that she did not want Sh. Tyagi to enter her room and she did not like him and he should not enter her room in future also.  He denied that Dr. Shikha Anand used any derogatory remarks around his disability like ‘Andha’.

12.       During the hearing, it was observed that the complainant was feeling extremely hurt and humiliated because of the treatment meted out to him by Dr. Shikha Anand.  It is however, difficult for an employee to put together the evidence in support of such incidents that may happen at work place.  It would be extremely difficult even for Committee comprising officers from outside the Department to prove such incidents beyond doubt.  Unfortunately, the attempt made by the department to make the parties sit together did not succeed as the complainant could not reach the place.  However, it is always possible to work towards sensitizing all concerned on the issues relating to the dignity of persons with disabilities.   Section 3 (i) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2016 mandates the appropriate government to ensure persons with disabilities enjoy the right to equality, life with dignity and respect for his or integrity equally with others.  Section 92 of the said Act also provides for punishment for intentionally insulting or intimidating with intent to humiliate a person with disability in any place within public view.  In the light of the circumstances of this case, a copy of this order is being sent to Dr. Shikha Anand, Director, DGET to introspect on the issue and be magnanimous to reach out to the complainant to assuage his hurt feelings and reassure him of equal treatment.

13.       The complaint is disposed off.       

14.       Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 28th day of February, 2018.
                                                                           
(T.D. Dhariyal )
                                      State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
Encl: As above 

Copy to:

Dr. Shikha Anand, Director, DGET. M/o Labour and Employment, Government of India, Shram Shakti Bhawan, Delhi with reference to para no. 12 of this order

Wednesday, February 28, 2018

T.R. Sharma Vs. Commissioner North Delhi Municipal Corporation | Case No. 13/1022/2017/10/5859-60 | Dated: 27.02.2018




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
Phone-011-23216002-04, 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. 13/1022/2017/10/5859-60                             Dated: 27.02.2018

In the matter of:

Sh. T.R. Sharma
JSA (LDC), Education Department
Civil Lines Zone, Delhi-110054                                ................ Complainant

                                          Versus                          
The Commissioner
North Delhi Municipal Corporation
Dr. S.P.M. Civic Centre
New Delhi-110002                                                 ………...…Respondent


ORDER
         
          The above named complainant, a person with visual impairment filed a complaint dated 23.10.2017 in which he alleged that he was transferred from Civil Line Zone to Keshav Puram Zone which is far away from his home. 
2.      The complaint was taken up with the respondent on 30.10.2017 followed by hearing notice dated 18.11.2017.  In the mean time,s a reply was received from the respondent vide letter No. AC/A.S.O-IV/CED/NDMC/2017 dated 21.12.2017.  As per the said letter, the grievance of the complainant about his posting has been considered by the North DMC and he has been retained in Education/CLZ vide office order No. S.O-I/CED/NDMC/2017/2735 Dated 27.11.2017. 

3.      The above reply was forwarded to the complainant on 12.01.2018 with advice to submit his comments, if any, within 10 days failing which the matter would be treated as closed.

2.      No communication from the complainant has been received till date. Accordingly, the complainant is closed and disposed off.

3.     Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 27th day of February, 2017.     

                                                                                          (T.D. Dhariyal)
                          State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities


Neeta Sarkar & 2 others Vs. Dte of Social Welfare | Case No. 4/1658/2017-Wel/CD/5862-64 | Dated: 27.02.2018


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
Phone-011-23216002-04, 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. 4/1658/2017-Wel/CD/5862-64                 Dated: 27.02.2018

In the matter of:

Ms. Neeta Sarkar,
D-370, Indra Park
Najafgarh, Delhi-110043.                                    …… Complainant   No.1  

Mrs. Sulata Sarkar
D-370, Indra Park,
Najafgarh, Delhi-110043.                                    ……. Complainant No.2

Sh. Bhanu Gopal Sarkar,
D-370, Indra Park,
Najafgarh, Delhi-110043.                                    …….Complainant  No.3

                                                      Versus
The Director,
Directorate of Social Welfare
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
GLNS Complex, Delhi Gate,
New Delhi-110002.                                                     …...…Respondent


ORDER

               Ms. Neeta Sarkar, D/o of B.G. Sarkar, a person with mental illness  vide her complaint dated 27.05.2017 submitted that she had not received Handicapped financial assistance for the month of April, 2017 though she submitted her Aadhaar  Card to the Union Bank of India, Najafgarh.  Ms. Sulata Sarkar, W/o Shri B.G. Sarkar, a person with mental illness vide her complaint dated 23.06.2017 also submitted that she was not getting her Handicapped Pension from April 2017 due to negligence of the officials of Social Welfare Department. The complaints were taken up with the respondent  vide notice date 27.07.2017 & 23.08.2017 respectively.

2.           Vide letter dated 23.08.2017 & 26.09.2017, Social Welfare Department submitted the following  status of the cases:

“Ms. Neeta Sarkar: Pension has been remitted regularly.  Her Aadhaar  has been linked with her account in Union Bank of India on 13.04.2017  and after that the enhanced pension @ Rs/ 2500/- p.m., the payment of Rs. 5000/- (April & May 2017) on 16.06.2017 and Rs. 5000/- (June and July 2017) on 03.08.2017 has been released into her Aadhaar linked account number 0488 Union Bank of India through PFMS.

Ms. Sulata Sarkar: Payment of Rs. 5000/- for the month of April and May 2017 was released on 06.06.2017 through PFMS and same was returned with the reason of inactive Aadhaar.  Therefore, the returned amount of Rs. 5000/-  alongwith the payment for next two months i.e. June & July 2017 Rs. 3000/- (@ Rs. 1500/- p.m. Aadhaar  is not linked with her bank account) have been released on 25.08.2017 through ECS (Electronic Clearing System of RBI) by this department into her banck account no. 691502010010498 Union Bank of India, Roshan Pura, Najafgarh.

At present her Aadhaar  is not linked with any bank.  To receive enhanced pension beneficiary may get Aadhaar  linked with her bank account. 

*Aadhaar  Bank linking status can be found on the mobile app by dialing *99*99# and giving Aadhaar  number.  Information about the bank to which the Aadhaar  is linked currently as well as date of linking as well as date of linking is provided through this method.”

3.           The above letters were forwarded to the complainants for comments if any vide letter dated 27.10.2017.  Though no comments were received, Sh. B.G Sarkar, was heard on 22.02.2018. He confirmed that Ms. Neeta Sarkar and Ms. Sulata Sarkar are now getting the increased disability pension @ Rs. 2500/- per month and this case can be closed. He also recorded his statement to this effect.   The issue of linking their Aadhaar to the account in Union Bank of India is the subject matter of another case.  Hence, the complaint is closed.

4.           Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 26st  day of February,  2018.                                     


                                                                                       (T.D. Dhariyal )
                      State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities


View the digitally signed PDF order here: