Supreme Court: Borrowers Retain Redemption Rights if Balance is Paid After Auction Deadline  ||  Supreme Court: Non-Confirmation of Seizure under Section 37A Impacts Adjudication Proceedings  ||  SC: Blacklisting After Contract Termination is Not Automatic and Needs Independent Review  ||  Grand Venice Fraud Case: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Satinder Singh Bhasin  ||  SC: Senior Employee Cannot Claim Same Lesser Penalty As Subordinate; Bank Manager's Dismissal Upheld  ||  Madras HC: Governor Must Follow Cabinet's Advice on Remission Decisions, Regardless of Personal View  ||  Kerala High Court: Entrepreneurs Must Be Protected From Baseless Protests to Boost Industrial Growth  ||  J&K&L High Court: Second FIR Valid if it Reveals a Broader Conspiracy; 'Test of Sameness' is Key  ||  Supreme Court: Expecting a Minor to Respond to a Public Court Notice is ‘Perverse’  ||  SC: Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Applies to S. 11 Arbitration Act, Barring Fresh Arbiration After Abandonment    

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 2026 - All Rights Reserved