Supreme Court Quashes Rajasthan Village Renaming, Says Government Must Follow its Own Policy  ||  NCLAT: NCLT Can Order Forensic Audit on its Own, No Separate Application Required  ||  NCLAT Reiterates That IBC Cannot be Invoked as a Recovery Tool for Contractual Disputes  ||  Delhi HC: DRI or Central Revenues Control Lab Presence in Delhi Alone Does Not Confer Jurisdiction  ||  Delhi High Court: Software Receipts Not Taxable on PE Basis Already Rejected by ITAT  ||  Delhi High Court: Statutory Appeals Cannot Be Denied Due to DRAT Vacancies or Administrative Delays  ||  J&K&L HC: Failure to Frame Limitation Issue Not Fatal; Courts May Examine Limitation Suo Motu  ||  Bombay HC: Preventing Feeding Stray Dogs at Society or Bus Stop is Not 'Wrongful Restraint'  ||  Gujarat HC: Not All Injuries Reduce Earning Capacity; Functional Disability Must Be Assessed  ||  Delhi HC: Framing of Charges is Interlocutory and Not Appealable under Section 21 of NIA Act    

Directorate of Education & Anr. v. Mr. Karam Vir Singh Rangi & Ors. - (High Court of Delhi) (11 Jan 2017)

Authorities acting under Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, have no power like a Court to pass judgment including directions in nature of injunction

MANU/DE/0071/2017

Civil

By present writ petition, Petitioners, including Petitioner no. 1/Directorate of Education impugns order of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities by which Commissioner of Disabilities has passed various directions against present Petitioners. Directions were passed against present petitioners in view of a complaint filed by six complainants before Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities and which persons have been arrayed as Respondent nos. 1 to 6 in this petition.

Issue in question is no longer res integra and has been decided by Supreme Court in its judgment in case of State Bank of Patiala and Others vs. Vinesh Kumar Bhasin. Supreme Court in its judgment holds that, authorities acting under Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, have no power like a Court to pass judgment including directions in the nature of injunction, etc.

In view of above, since Respondent no. 7, Chief Commissioner Acting under Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act has no power to pass impugned order, this writ petition is allowed setting aside the same.

Tags : AUTHORITY   POWER   SCOPE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved