Summary of Judgments

HIGH COURT GRANTS RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR MORE THAT 6600 HUTMENTS DWELLERS OF BARODA CITY IN GUJARAT Gujarat/  11.01.2010

In a significant achievement on Housing Front, HRLN Lawyer Mr. Subramaniam Iyer achieved residential accommodation for more than 6600 hutment dwellers of Baroda city in Gujarat under Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission. In Special Leave Petition No. 6029 of 2008, Jan Sangharsh Manch Versus State of Gujarat, the division bench comprising Chief Justice Mr. S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice Anant S. Dave of Gujarat HC has passed excellent order dated 11 January, 2010, directing Baroda Municipal Corporation to make allotment of houses by July 2010. Such houses measuring 25.64 sq.mtrs cost Rs. 1.28 lacs. However, 50% cost has to be borne by the Central Government, 20% cost to be borne by the State Government, 12% cost to be borne by the Municipal Corporation and thus such houses shall be made available to hutment dwellers only on the 18% of total cost.

For further details contact:
Advocate S.H. Iyer,
Mobile: 098250 33457
Email: ahmedabad@hrln.org 

Click here to download full judgment

Callousness of Delhi Government over plight of construction workers in Common Wealth Game’s Projects infuriates Delhi High Court, Exemplary Compensation Awarded.

Taking a very serious note of callousness of State Government towards construction workers engaged by various Government Agencies under various projects for Common Wealth Games, Division Bench of Hon’ble Delhi High Court comprising Chief Justice Deepak Mishra and Justice Manmohan, on 22.09.2010 has warned the state authorities to be mindful of their obligations and has awarded compensation to the victim workmen. Hon’ble Court observed:

“Be it noted, the said authority should not feel that their job is over because the Member Secretary, DLSA is holding legal aid camps or assisting them. If the said authorities forget their statutory obligations, we may think of directing the State Government to initiate disciplinary proceedings against them.”

This order has come in the background of incident dated 21.09.10 where a footbridge near Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, the main venue of the Commonwealth Games, collapsed rendering 23 construction workers injured and 4 critically injured. Delhi Government announced Rs 50,000/- for injured workers and Rs 1,00,000/- for critically injured workers as compensation which Hon’ble Delhi High Court has increased to Rs. 1,00,000/- and Rs, 3,00,000/- respectively. In total the compensation so awarded reaches Rupees 35,00,000/-.

On being informed that a First Information Report has been registered by the Police regarding this incident, Hon’ble court directed the investigation to be conducted by Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime Branch).

The court has passed these directions while hearing public interest litigation filed by People's Union for Democratic Rights on the issue of gross violations being done by the State Government in pursuit of Common Wealth Games. This latest order confirms that death of 109 workmen working under Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) only and till now in only 65 cases compensation has been paid by DMRC and for rest 44 cases Delhi Legal Services Authority is making intervention. However Court directed ex-gratia payment amounting to Rupees 2,00,000/- be paid within a period of two weeks to the legal heirs of deceased workmen, pending final decision of the Labour Welfare Fund Committee. Responding to the issue of contractors not making any arrangements for safety of workmen, Court has directed the Labour Commissioner, the Deputy Labour Commissioner and the Assistant Labour Commissioner to visit each site where work is being conducted by various other agencies and to find out the number of deaths occurred on those sites and to ensure that safety equipments are given to the workmen and has warned of contempt proceedings in case of any failure in this regard.

When lawyer for the petitioner appraised the Court about no improvement in the living conditions of the workmen in spite of Court’s earlier direction, Court directed:

“…We direct that the Chairman of NDMC, Commissioner of MCD, Vice-Chairman of DDA, Director General of Sports Authority of India, Director General of CPWD, Managing Director of Delhi International Airport Limited and Executive Director of DMRC shall be personally liable if any deviancy is shown.”

For Further Details, please contact:
Advocate Tariq Adeeb
Human Rights Law Network
Mob: 09310677131
Email: litigation.delhi@hrln.org

click here to download full judgment

Supreme Court of India upholds the rights of persons with cerebral palsy to employment, calling for sensitive handling of cases of people with disability

New Delhi 10.03.2010 

In a landmark judgement, the Supreme Court on March 10^th has upheld the rights of the persons with cerebral palsy to employment. Hon’ble Supreme Court observed about this case in its Judgment:  

“ …this case is not one of the normal cases relating to a person’s claim for employment. This case involves a beneficial piece of social legislation to enable persons with certain forms of disability to live a life of purpose and human dignity. This is a case which has to be handled with sensitivity and not with bureaucratic apathy, as appears to have been done as far as the appellant is concerned.” 

The case involved a person with cerebral palsy in Jammu & Kashmir. He completed his BSc and was offered employment under a scheme of the government of Jammu and Kashmir known as a Rehbar-e-Taleem, which literally translated means, a “Teaching Guide.” In spite of having stood first in the merit list, this person was not given an employment letter on the basis of a complaint filed by a person who stood 4th in the merit list and who questioned his appointment on the ground of his disability. Aggrieved at not being given the letter of employment in-spite of standing 1st in the merit list, he approached the High Court where his plea was dismissed. Further aggrieved by this decision of the High Court he appealed against the order in the division bench, which in an unusual approach examined petitioner in Court, and finding him lacking, passed an order upholding the order of the single bench. 

Frustrated, petitioner approached the Supreme Court for setting aside the judgement of the High Court and appealed for his employment. 

Mr Colin Gonsalves, Sr Advocate argued on behalf of petitioner and stated that the J & K High Court had violated the provisions of Section 22 of the Persons With Disability Act. Advocate Colin also argued on the concept of reasonable accommodation stating that provisions of aids and appliances like computers, LCD projectors be made available to petitioner to help overcome his difficulty in writing on the blackboard and which did not require the Education department to cast an undue financial burden on the state.

Hearing the arguments Justice Altamas Kabir and Justice Cyriac Joseph observed that the approach of the local authorities and High Court was not in consonance with the objects of the PWD Act and setting aside the order of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, ordered reinstatement with continuity of service from the date of disengagement with the period between disengagement and reappointment not to be considered as break in service and entitlement to all notional benefits for the said period of disengagement.

Hon’ble Supreme Court observed: 

“It is unfortunate that in spite of the positive aspects of the appellant’s functioning as Rehbar-e-Taleem and the clear and unambiguous object of the1998 Act, the High Court adopted a view which wasn’t compatible therewith. The High Court has dealt with the matter mechanically, without even referring to the 1998 Act or even the provisions of Sections 22 and 27 thereof. Instead, the High Court chose a rather unusual method in assessing the appellant’s capacity to function as a teacher by calling him to appear before the Court and to respond to questions put to him. The High Court appeared to be insensitive to the fact that as victim of cerebral palsy, the appellant suffered from a slight speech disability, which must have worsened on account of nervousness when asked to appear before the Court to answer questions. As has been submitted by Mr. Gonsalves, the intimidating atmosphere in which the appellant found himself must have triggered a reaction which made it difficult for him to respond to the questions put to him.” 

Please find attached copy of this Judgement. 

For more information Please contact: 

click here to download full judgment

HRLN filed a petition in public interest in the start of year 2010 before Hon’ble Delhi Court drawing the attention of the court to the plight of construction workers in Delhi.   Minimum wages were not being paid to most of the workers; the wages were paid irregularly after considerable delays; safety equipment and identity cards and wage slips were not being made available to the workers and no provisions for residence of the workers and their family members, as required to be made under Law were being made. Though the welfare fund set up in accordance with The Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996 stands at Rs.300 crores but the Welfare Board in Delhi was dysfunctional and was not been meeting regularly and did not show any track record of commitment to labour issues. Only Rs.15 lacs out of the sum of Rs.300 crores was spend for the benefit of the workers.  The petition showed a grave state of affairs, and showcased a total apathy towards the construction workers who form a   large migrant community, in spite of law for their benefit having been enacted.

The Act aforesaid was promulgated recognizing that the construction workers belong to one of the most vulnerable segments of unorganized labour in India and are characterized by the inherent risk to life and limb; their work is casual in character and there is only a temporary relationship of employer and employee and that too with uncertain work hours, lack of basic amenities and inadequacy of welfare facilities.

Taking cognizance of grievances raised in the petition, Hon’ble Delhi High Court constituted four-member committee for taking appropriate steps to redress the grievance of the construction workers in Delhi and for implementation of provisions of the Act.  Hon’ble Court also directed the Welfare Board constituted under the provisions of the Act to hold extra/special meetings and to comply with the various provisions of the Act/Rules and ensure issuance of identity cards to all the construction workers in Delhi.

The said committee has been constituted and has started functioning. This petition is still going on and there are more orders awaited.

Click here to download a copy of this order

Delhi High Court rules on Reproductive Rights Violations - Ground breaking judgment 

In a ground breaking judgment postively impacting the Reproductive Rights of millions of women in India, Justice Muralidhar, Delhi High Court sought accountability for India's shamefully high levels of maternal deaths and maternal morbidity, ironically on International Women's Day. Hearing two cases of Reproductive Rights violations, advocated by the Human Rights Law Network - Laxmi Mandal v NCT Delhi & Ors W.P. (c) 8853/2008, the victim Shanti Devi, a scheduled caste woman, living below the  poverty line, was denied her reproductive rights and tragically lost her life minutes after she gave birth to a premature newborn; and in Jatuin v MCD Maternity Home MCD & Ors 10700/2009 involving a poor, homeless, young woman, after being denied emergency obstetric care was forced to publicly deliver her newborn child under a tree, minutes from India gate.      

''The broad issues in these petitions are concerned with the reproductive rights of health as well as the rights of the newly born free treatment and care in government medical facilities essentially on the ground that they are persons below the poverty line. From what has transpired in these cases thus far it is plain that there are some schemes formulated by both the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi ('GNCTD') as well as the Central Government to address the issues. However, there appear to be no operation guidelines issued that can actually facilitate the accessing of free medical care by expectant mothers and the newly born babies, belonging to the below the poverty line category. 

These petitions also raise a larger question as to the question as to the availability of free treatment and care anywhere in the country where these persons may be compelled to move due to some reason or the other. In other words, the Union of India will have to come out with a set of instruction, in co-ordination with GNCTD in the instant care, to ensure that the entitlements to free medical treatment and care of persons below the poverty line is not denied merely on account of their having to move away.'' Said Justice S Muralidhar 

Justice Muralidhar further directed the highly esteemed Doctor Prakasamma,   Executive Director of the Academy of Nursing Studies and Women's Empowerment Research Studies to conduct a 'maternal audit with respect to the death of Shanti Devi. 'The remit of Dr M. Prakasamma will include examining the

circumstances under which initially Shanti Devi, when she was admitted to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital on 19th November 2008, was found to be carrying a dead foetus and the events subsequent.' 

For further information, please contact Jameen Kaur 097 11 268 235

jameen.kaur@hrln.org