Sugam Singh v. UOI and Ors

T.S. THAKUR,J ARUNA SURESH, J JANUARY 30, 2008 anb

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10424/2006 Date of Decision: th January, 2008 . SUGAM SINGH ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Aagney Sail, Mr. Jai Singh, advs. versus UOI AND ORS. .... Respondents Through Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Mr. Harshit Aggarwal, adv. for DDA. Ms. Zubeda Begum with Ms. Iram Majid, adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ARUNA SURESH 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Not Necessary 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Not Necessary 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Not Necessary Per Thakur, J (Oral) Section 43 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 enjoins upon the appropriate Government and local authorities to frame schemes by notification to be issued in that regard providing for preferential allotment of land at concessional rates for purposes among others of setting up business. Section 43 reads as under: "43. Schemes for preferential allotment of land for certain purposes.- The appropriate Governments and local authorities shall by notification frame schemes in favour of persons with disabilities, for the preferential allotment of land at concessional rates of- (a) house; (b) setting up business; (c) setting up of special recreation centres; (d) establishment of special schools; (e) establishment of research centres; (f) establishment of factories by entrepreneurs with disabilities." 2. It is not in dispute that in discharge of the above statutory obligation, the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India had formulated a scheme notified in terms of notification dated 17th November, 2003 providing for preferential allotment of land at concessional rates to persons with disabilities. The said scheme was, it appears, reviewed and a modified scheme published in terms of notification dated 19th April, 2004. Even this scheme was, it appears, reviewed by the Government pursuant to directions issued by this Court in "Sarita Sinha Vs. DDA", CWP 8877/2005 and a revised scheme/policy published in terms of a memorandum dated 9th October, 2006. A copy of the said scheme/memorandum has been produced by the respondents as 'Annexure R-1' to the counter affidavit filed by them. A reading of the said revised scheme would show that the same inter alia provides for reservation of 1% in allotment of flats and plots and 5% in allotment of shops for persons with disability as defined in Section 2 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. Para I(i) of the scheme is in this regard relevant which may be extracted: "(I) PREFERENTIAL ALLOTMENT: (i) 1% reservation in allotment of flats and plots and 5% reservation in allotment of shops will henceforth be provided to the Persons with disability as defined in Section 2 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. The above reservation will not be applicable in case of auction mode of disposal." 3. The petitioner's grievance in the present writ petition now is that although he is a handicapped person eligible for an allotment against the 5% quota reserved in connection with allotment of shops, his claim has not been considered by the DDA. He has also found fault with the scheme dated 17th November, 2003 prevalent earlier providing for preferential allotment of land among those eligible for the same. 4. When this petition came up for hearing before this Court on 6th November, 2007, this Court directed the DDA to state on affidavit as to how many shops/commercial units had been allotted after coming into force the policy of reservation dated 19th April, 2004 and how many out of the said allotments have been made in favour of persons suffering from disabilities. The Court observed that the said information would be necessary for determining whether 5% of the total num