The Petitioner has filed a PIL for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of the people with disability under Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
The Petitioner is a registered organisation for persons with disabilities. The organisation was established in the year 1992 with the objective of accessing Rights and welfare of persons with disabilities. The Association has a membership of around 500 people all over Karnataka. The Petitioner as an association of Persons with disabilities also represents all the disabled people and their families all over Karnataka, who are affected by the action of the First, Second and Third Respondents, calling for tenders for allotment of STD Booths.
The Petitioner states that the booths were allotted on the basis of letter sent from Office Of Director General, Posts and Telegraphs to the General Manager, Telephones, Delhi Telephone District, New Delhi-110050, dated 23rd December 1980 stating about the welfare schemes for ensuring the self employment and livelihood for handicapped people by providing public telephone booths at airports / railway stations and bus stands and other public places.
The Respondents cannot ask the present booth holders to vacate and give the booths to others who can pay a better price as it violates the very object of the scheme and the Act which is to ensure welfare of the disabled
As the date of expiry of the license came near and also as the Government started calling for fresh tenders for allotting STD/ISD Booths in various Bus Stations, the persons with disabilities felt panicky and absolutely insecure about their employment and source of livelihood. In similar scenario in other states Various High Courts were approached for granting interim stay against allotting the booths or issuing license to any other persons other than those who are already license holders. The courts such as in the case of the High Courts of Tamil nadu and Kerala, after examining the issue, have ordered stay against calling for tenders
It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass an Order or Direction or a Writ particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus,
To quash the Tender Notification dated 16/11/2007 produced.
Directing the First and Second Respondents not to displace the persons with disability who are presently running the STD/ISD/PCO booths from their present location of self employment...
Directing the Respondents No.1 to 3 to extend the licences granted to the existing allottees to run STD/ISD/PCO booths in the BMTC stations.
Directing the Respondents to not pass any order, direction, Notification, etc., or undertake any action, resulting in the existing allottees loosing their present employment and occupation of STD/ISD/PCO booths in the BMTC stations.
In the alternative, to a rehabilitation Scheme under Sections 38 and 43 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 for the existing allottees and to not displace them from their present occupation till such rehabilitation scheme is implemented. Pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the Case and thus render justice.
The Petitioner is a registered organisation for persons with disabilities. The organisation was established in the year 1992 with the objective of accessing Rights and welfare of persons with disabilities. The Association has a membership of around 500 people all over Karnataka. The Petitioner as an association of Persons with disabilities also represents all the disabled people and their families all over Karnataka, who are affected by the action of the First, Second and Third Respondents, calling for tenders for allotment of STD Booths.
The Petitioner states that the booths were allotted on the basis of letter sent from Office Of Director General, Posts and Telegraphs to the General Manager, Telephones, Delhi Telephone District, New Delhi-110050, dated 23rd December 1980 stating about the welfare schemes for ensuring the self employment and livelihood for handicapped people by providing public telephone booths at airports / railway stations and bus stands and other public places.
The Respondents cannot ask the present booth holders to vacate and give the booths to others who can pay a better price as it violates the very object of the scheme and the Act which is to ensure welfare of the disabled
As the date of expiry of the license came near and also as the Government started calling for fresh tenders for allotting STD/ISD Booths in various Bus Stations, the persons with disabilities felt panicky and absolutely insecure about their employment and source of livelihood. In similar scenario in other states Various High Courts were approached for granting interim stay against allotting the booths or issuing license to any other persons other than those who are already license holders. The courts such as in the case of the High Courts of Tamil nadu and Kerala, after examining the issue, have ordered stay against calling for tenders
It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass an Order or Direction or a Writ particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus,
To quash the Tender Notification dated 16/11/2007 produced.
Directing the First and Second Respondents not to displace the persons with disability who are presently running the STD/ISD/PCO booths from their present location of self employment...
Directing the Respondents No.1 to 3 to extend the licences granted to the existing allottees to run STD/ISD/PCO booths in the BMTC stations.
Directing the Respondents to not pass any order, direction, Notification, etc., or undertake any action, resulting in the existing allottees loosing their present employment and occupation of STD/ISD/PCO booths in the BMTC stations.
In the alternative, to a rehabilitation Scheme under Sections 38 and 43 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 for the existing allottees and to not displace them from their present occupation till such rehabilitation scheme is implemented. Pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the Case and thus render justice.
0 comments:
Post a Comment