Bombay HC upholds Rights of Disabled, says they should not be deprived

Must Read

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract....

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish...

Follow us

In recent times, it has been seen that proper attention has not given to the Rights of Disabled as per the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 by the authorities of government in Maharashtra. Bombay High Court has given a judgement recently for the protections of the rights of disabled.

Facts of the case

A division bench of  Justice SC Dharmadhikari and Justice RI Chagla was hearing PILs filed by two NGOs together, All India Handicapped Development Foundation and Rashtriya Apang Vikas Mahasangh. These PILs emphasized on the proper implementation of provisions given to the persons with disabilities under the Indian Constitution. The core elements which were enhanced by them were equal opportunities provided to them, seats reserved in various departments and full participation in their capacity.

The eminent point was after the enactment of 2016 regarding the protection of rights of disabled still after 3 years the lack of sensibility towards them has not been reduced. The Court here observed that the reason behind this is unawareness about the rights provided to them and these rights cannot be deprived by the related authorities.

Arguments

From the side of State of Maharashtra Advocate GW Mattos presented on the court that government is sincere and fully aware about the situation at ground level and would take all the necessary steps for the enforcement of the all the provisions stated as per enactment 2016.

The Court noted that though government taking steps for the fulfilment of all the provisions somewhere the highest authority must focus on making various departments aware about such facts and the other reason also noted for lack of application of rights of disabled is-

“This comes because there is no awareness of the fact that persons with disabilities have rights. These rights cannot be frustrated and defeated by a lacklustre attitude and refusal to implement the law, enacted by Parliament, in right earnest. That Law has to be implemented sincerely and all efforts will have to be made for the effective implementation and enforcement thereof. That is possible only when officials of the State and those in charge of municipal governance and civic affairs are enlightened enough and for that, the State would have to conduct and carry out training and awareness programmes.”

Conclusion

In the end, the court noted:

“The expectancy is that tomorrow’s Heads of Departments are made aware of this Legislation and particularly about the rights of disabled persons with disabilities. It is possible that a disabled or differently-abled person may not be aware of his/her rights but he/she should not be deprived of the necessary assistance and support because of lack of sensitivity of his/her colleagues and the public at large. We feel that holding of programmes for the awareness of the officers of the State should be made compulsory.”

The Court in this regard asked the State to take the help of the Maharashtra Legal Services Authority and lawyers involved in PILs filed on the issue, including Senior Counsel Gayatri Singh.

The further hearing has been postponed on 12 December 2019.

[googlepdf url=”http://libertatem.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Bombay-HC-Disables-Should-Not-Be-Deprived-of-Their-Rights.pdf” download=”Download Judgement PDF” width=”100%” height=”900″]


Contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now. You can also join our Team of Courtroom and regularly contribute cases like the above one.

For more Courtroom Updates, check out our Courtroom Page

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board & Anr., via video-conferencing. Deeming the...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish Bisht & Anr. v. State...

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Against National Stock Exchange For Lack Of Merit

In the case of A. Kumar v. Financial Intelligence Unit & Ors., A. Kumar filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution...

The Federal Appeals Court Holds Trump’s Diversion of Military Funds To Build the Wall To Be Unlawful

The Federal Appeals Court held that US President Donald Trump’s diversion of military funds to build the wall is unlawful. A grey area in the...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Filed Challenging the Judgment of Madras High Court in Ganesan v. State Represented by Its Inspector of Police

An appeal was filed before the Supreme court, challenging the judgment & order of Madras High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the HC judgment...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -