NIPUN MALHOTRA vs GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

,,,

In view of our order dated 1 June, 2018, we are hereunder recording our reasons for continuation of the assurance made by Mr. Anand Grover, ld. Senior Counsel on 14th May, 2018 and prohibiting the respondents from acquiring standard",,,

floor buses.,,,

In the training programme, conducted by the Delhi High Court, on 12th and 13th July, 2014, captioned as “Making court room practices responsive towards victims of sexual offencesâ€, one of the resource persons in the session onÂ",,,

Laxmi Narayan Tripathi, a six feet plus transgender activist, while leading a training session of 60 judges, 20 prosecutors, 40 police officials and 20 legal aid lawyers at the District Courts, Saket, stood before them and asked the following",,,

poignant question :,,,

“Am I invisible?â€​,,,

There was stunned silence in the room as keeping in view of Laxmi’s vibrant personality, the answer was so obvious. Laxmi had to repeat the question multiple times before there was a roar of a negative response. What Laxmi",,,

stated thereafter sums up exactly what specially-abled people in Delhi in the present case, must be experiencing. Laxmi Narayan Tripathi, then asked all the legally trained minds in the room :Â Â",,,

“Then why do you treat me so?â€​,,,

This is the very question which the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 on wheelchairs before us are asking of the respondents before us. Why are they being treated as invisible and non-existent despite the Constitutional recognition of their rights as well,,,

as the statutory provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2016 ensuring equality and non-discrimination to the differently-abled?",,,

Background facts,,,

Certain background facts first. W.P.(C) No. 9643/2017 was filed by Mr. Nipun Malhotra (petitioner no.1), who has severe locomotor disability from birth, called “arthrogryposisâ€, which is a medical condition which leads to a lack of",,,

muscles in his arms and legs and renders him permanently dependant on a wheelchair for basic mobility. Despite the limitation from this medical condition, the petitioner no.1 along with his mother Mrs. Priyanka Malhotra has set up the",,,

Nipman Foundation which is actively involved in the field of disability rights. 5. The writ petition assails the Cabinet Decision No.2503 & 2504 taken on 1st September, 2017 for acquisition of standard floor buses which were to be rolled out",,,

within one year depriving numerous persons with disabilities residing in Delhi, as well as ousting senior citizens, from access to public transport. We reproduce these decisions hereafter:",,,

“GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT (CO-ORDINATION BRANCH),,,

DELHI SECRETARIAT, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI",,,

No. F.3/32017/GAD/CN/Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Dated: 04.09.2017,,,

CABINET DECISION NO. 2503 DATED 01/09/2017,,,

Subject:Â Â Engagement of 1000 Fully Built CNG Propelled Standard Size Buses with 900 mm floor height through Private Entities in Cluster No. 13,16 and 14(partial) by the Transport Department.",,,

Decision:Â Â The Council of Ministers considered the note of Secretary (Transport) and approved the proposal contained in para-7 of the cabinet note with the direction that the roll out will begin within 06 months and be completed within 10,,,

months.,,,

--Sd/--,,,

(Dr. M.M. Kutty),,,

Secretary to the Cabinet,,,

Dated: 04.09.2017,,,

No. F.3/3/2017/GAD/CNâ€​,,,

“GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI,,,

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT (CO-ORDINATION BRANCH) DELHI SECRETARIAT, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI",,,

No. F.3/32017/GAD/CN/Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Dated: 04.09.2017,,,

CABINET DECISION NO. 2504 DATED 01/09/2017,,,

Subject:Â Procurement of 1000 Fully built Non-AC CNG propelled standard size buses with standard floor height of 900 mm by DTC without AMC from Vehicle Manufacturers.,,,

Decision:Â The Council of Ministers considered the note of Secretary (Transport) and approved the proposal contained in para-7 of the cabinet note with the direction that the roll out will begin within 08 months and be completed within 12,,,

months.,,,

--Sd/--,,,

(Dr. M.M.Kutty),,,

Secretary to the Cabinet,,,

Dated: 04.09.2017,,,

No. F.3/3/2017/GAD/CNâ€​,,,

These decisions were given publicity in newspapers on the 7th of September 2017, which newspaper clipping are annexed to the writ petition.",,,

WP(C) No. 9643/2017 was filed on or around 16th October, 2017 seeking the following prayers:",,,

“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents 1 â€" 4 to take immediate and urgent steps to stay the purchase of 2000 public transport standard floor buses.",,,

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents no.1-4 to provide the rationale behind the decision to procure non-disabled friendly public transport standard floor buses;",,,

(c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents no.1-4 to take immediate and urgent steps to conduct a feasibility study involving representatives from the disabled community for procurement of",,,

disabled friendly, accessible low-floor public transport;",,,

(d) Direct the Respondents to mandatorily involve Persons with Disability, such as Petitioner in policy decisions, such as purchase of public transport, which affects Persons with Disability, so that their issues are addressed and resolved without",,,

undue delay;,,,

(e) To award costs of this Petition to the Petitioner; and/or.â€​,,,

 8. So far as Cabinet Decision No.2503 & 2504 taken on 1st September, 2017 for acquisition of standard floor buses is concerned, to support this decision, the Transport Department â€" respondent no.4 in its status report dated 13th",,,

November, 2017 has stated as follows :",,,

“a. The Council of Ministers, Government of NCT of Delhi vide Cabinet Decisions No.2503 & 2504 dated 01.09.2017 inter-alia decided that 1000 fully built Non-AC CNG propelled standard size buses with standard floor height of 900 mm,",,,

each, shall be inducted in Cluster and DTC operation (total 2000 buses);Â",,,

(b) The powers for selection of low floor, semi low floor and standard floor height buses is given to the State Government by the Bus Body Code issued by MORTH, GOI under relevant provisions of CMVR. (A copy of the said provisions is",,,

annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-I);,,,

(c) The Hon’ble Supreme Court has also decided that selection of the height of the floor of the bus shall be made by the State Government in accordance with the bus body code. (A copy of the relevant order passed by the Hon’ble,,,

Supreme Court is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-II);,,,

(d) It is pertinent to mention here that Ministry of Road, Transport & Highways, Government of India (hereinafter “MoRTHâ€) vide their letter dated 04.03.2016 referred the meeting of the Committee of Secretaries held on 18.01.2016 to",,,

review the Accessible India Campaign (Sugamya Bharat Abhiyan) wherein one of the specified targets is that 10% of Government owned public transport is to be made fully accessible to the Persons with Disability by March, 2018. (A copy",,,

of the letter dated 04.03.2016 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-III);,,,

(e) The MoRTH, GOI further requested that all the State Governments/Union Territories complies with the directions and ensure that 10% of Government owned public transport be made accessible to the Persons with Disability by March,",,,

2018;,,,

(f) Vide letter dated 07.04.2017, the MoRTH further requested the Managing Director of all the STUs to take necessary action as per Motor Vehicles Act for making 10% of Government owned public transport vehicle fully accessible to the",,,

Persons with Disability by March, 2018. (A copy of the letter dated 07.04.2017 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-IV).â€​",,,

 9. Thereafter, on the 20th April, 2018, Sh. Nipun Malhotra, filed WP(C) No. 5142/2018, challenging the tender of procurement of 1000 buses by the Govt. of NCT Delhi pursuant to the above Cabinet decision, and sought the following",,,

prayers:,,,

“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, thereby quashing, setting aside and declaring as null and void the RFP Document dated 15.03.2018 issued by the Respondent No. 3 for open tender of 1000 Standard Floor",,,

Buses.,,,

(b) Direct the Respondents to mandatorily involve Persons with Disability, such as Petitioner in policy decisions, such as purchase of public transport, which affects Persons with Disability , so that their issues are addressed and resolved",,,

without undue delay.,,,

(c) To award costs of this Petition to the Petitioner;â€​Â,,,

So far as the acquisition of these buses is concerned, the Transport Department of GNCTD has placed a short note on a scheme for running what are termed as “cluster buses†in Delhi. For expediency, we extract the same",,,

hereunder :,,,

“A. ISSUES INVOLVED,,,

i. That in the Public Interest Litigation bearing W.P.(Crl.) 878/2007 titled ‘Court on its own motion vs. State of Delhi & Ors.’, taking note of the havoc created by repeated fatal accidents being caused by erstwhile ‘Blue-Line’",,,

buses operating in Delhi and the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (1997) 8 SCC 770, the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Delhi High Court issued SuoMoto notice to the GNCT of",,,

Delhi and the Ministry of Transport, Government of India, the central theme being to direct the Government to formulate a proper policy and provide better transport system in the city, including adequate number of transport buses.",,,

ii. That pursuant to the orders passed by the Hon’ble Court directing that the Scheme for replacement of blue line buses be prepared and filed by the specified date. The Transport Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi had entrusted the",,,

task of providing the required consultancy for formulating the detailed Scheme to DIMTS (Delhi Integrated Multi-Model Transit System). DIMTS thereafter, submitted the report titled “Report on Methodology for operations of Privately",,,

Owned Stage Carriage Buses in Delhiâ€​ on October 31, 2007.",,,

iii. That accordingly, the Government of NCT of Delhi in an effort to provide a safer, more efficient, reliable and better quality public transport system for the benefit of commuters, decided to introduce a new scheme for operation of Private",,,

Stage Carriage Services. The Scheme provided for private stage carriage buses through corporate entities to replace the existing blue line buses run by the individual private operations. The new scheme envisaged the concurrent operation,,,

of DTC and private operators in ‘Clusters’ under a unified time table with each cluster being part of a network for providing stage carriage services for Delhi.,,,

v. That the Delhi Integrated Multi Modal Transit System Limited (DIMTS) was appointed by the GNCTD as the integrating mechanism on its behalf to manage, supervise and oversee the day to day operation of the cluster buses under a",,,

Agreement in this regard between the Department of Transport and DIMTS.Â,,,

vi. That currently, 1652 buses are in operation in 08 operative clusters and global tenders for induction of additional 1000 buses under 04 new cluster projects are at the final stages of considerationâ€​",,,

(Emphasis by us),,,

So far as the decision which has been assailed in the writ petition is concerned, the respondents have set out the following steps taken by it :",,,

Sr.No.,Particulars,Dates,

1.,"Approval

                      Â

of                     Â

the               Cabinet

                     for

engagement of 1000 cluster buses",01.09.2017,

2.,Approval of the Cabinet for Tender Documents,09.01.2018,

3.,Publication of Tender in newspapers,20.01.2018,

4.,"Last          date

                  of

         submission

                  of

bids/opening of bids",21.02.2018,

5.,Submission of Technical Evaluation Report,31.03.2018,

6.,Opening of Price Bid,12.04.2018,

7.,Submission of Financial Evaluation Report,18.04.2018,

8.,"Approval of Cabinet for Award for Contract to

ConcessionairesÂ",18.05.2018,

9.,"Issue       of             Â

LOA Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â and

            signing

               of

Concession AgreementÂ","Subject

                                                                                Â

to outcome WP(C)

9643/2017

the of",

 xxx     xxx     xxx,,,

Accessibility: - The Central Government shall, in consultation with the Chief Commissioner, formulate rules for persons with disabilities laying down the standards of accessibility for the physical environment, transportation, information and",,,

communications, including appropriate technologies and systems, and other facilities and services provided to the public in urban and rural areas.Â",,,

Access to transport,,,

(1) The appropriate Government shall take suitable measures to provide,â€"Â",,,

(a) facilities for persons with disabilities at bus stops, railway stations and airports conforming to the accessibility standards relating to parking spaces, toilets, ticketing counters and ticketing machines;Â",,,

(b) access to all modes of transport that conform the design standards, including retrofitting old modes of transport, wherever technically feasible and safe for persons with disabilities, economically viable and without entailing major structural",,,

changes in design;,,,

(c) accessible roads to address mobility necessary for persons with disabilities.Â,,,

(2) The appropriate Government shall develop schemes programmes to promote the personal mobility of persons with disabilities at affordable cost to provide for,â€"Â",,,

(a) incentives and concessions;Â,,,

(b) retrofitting of vehicles; and (c) personal mobility assistance.,,,

(c) personal mobility assistanceâ€​,,,

 xxx         xxx       xxx,,,

Time limit for accessibility by service providers:-,,,

he service providers whether Government or private shall provide services in accordance with the rules on accessibility formulated by the Central Government under section 40 within a period of two years from the date of notification of such,,,

rules:Â,,,

Provided that the Central Government in consultation with the Chief Commissioner may grant extension of time for providing certain category of services in accordance with the said rules.Â,,,

Human Resource Development-,,,

(1) Without prejudice to any function and power of Rehabilitation Council of India constituted under the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992, the appropriate Government shall endeavour to develop human resource for the purposes of this",,,

Act and to that end shall,â€"Â",,,

(a) mandate training on disability rights in all courses for the training of Panchayati Raj Members, legislators, administrators, police officials, judges and lawyers;Â",,,

(b) induct disability as a component for all education courses for schools, colleges and University teachers, doctors, nurses, para-medical personnel, social welfare officers, rural development officers, asha workers, anganwadi workers,",,,

engineers, architects, other professionals and community workers;Â",,,

(c) initiate capacity building programmes including training in independent living and community relationships for families, members of community and other stakeholders and care providers on care giving and support;Â",,,

(d) ensure independence training for persons with disabilities to build community relationships on mutual contribution and respect;Â,,,

(e) conduct training programmes for sports teachers with focus on sports, games, adventure activities;Â",,,

(f) any other capacity development measures as may be required.Â,,,

(2) All Universities shall promote teaching and research in disability studies including establishment of study centres for such studies.Â,,,

(3) In order to fulfil the obligation stated in sub-section (1), the appropriate Government shall in every five years undertake a need based analysis and formulate plans for the recruitment, induction, sensitisation, orientation and training of suitable",,,

personnel to undertake the various responsibilities under this Act.,,,

48. Social audit-,,,

The appropriate Government shall undertake social audit of all general schemes and programmes involving the persons with disabilities to ensure that the scheme and programmes do not have an adverse impact upon the persons with,,,

disabilities and need the requirements and concerns of persons with disabilities.,,,

 xxx         xxx       xxx,,,

Power of Central Government to make rules-,,,

(1) The Central Government may, subject to the condition of previous publication, by notification, make rules for carrying out the provisions of this Act.Â",,,

(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:â€"Â",,,

(a) the manner of constituting the Committee for Research on Disability under sub-section (2) of section 6;Â,,,

(b) the manner of notifying the equal opportunity policy under sub-section (1) of section 21;Â,,,

(c) the form and manner of maintaining records by every establishment under sub-section (1) of section 22;Â,,,

(d) the manner of maintenance of register of complaints by grievance redressal officer under subsection (3) of section 23;Â,,,

(e) the manner of furnishing information and return by establishment to the Special Employment Exchange under section 36;Â,,,

(f) the composition of the Assessment Board under subsection (2) and manner of assessment to be made by the Assessment Board under sub-section (3) of section 38;Â,,,

(g) rules for person with disabilites laying down the standards of accessibility under section 40;,,,

 xxx       xxx       xxxâ€​,,,

Harmonised Guidelines and Space Standards for Barrier Free Built,,,

Environment for Persons With Disabilities and Elderly Persons,,,

The petitioner has placed before this court directions issued by the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India in February, 2016 titled “Harmonised Guidelines and Space Standards for Barrier Free Built Environment for",,,

Persons With Disabilities and Elderly Personsâ€​ (hereafter referred to as the ‘Harmonised Guidelines’).,,,

These also came into existence while Rajive Raturi was pending adjudication.,,,

Under para 11.7 of these Harmonised Guidelines, explicit imperatives so far as public transport is concerned are made. We extract hereunder the relevant extract of the Harmonised Guidelines so far as buses are concerned:",,,

“11.7 Public TransportÂ,,,

11.7.1 Land TransportÂ,,,

11.7.1.1 GeneralÂ,,,

Buses, trams, taxis, mini-buses and three-wheelers should be designed as far as practicable to include facilities that can accommodate people with disabilities.Â",,,

New vehicles when purchased should comply with accessibility standards to enable all people, including those in wheelchairs, to use the service provided.Â",,,

Equally important, travel routes to bus stops should also be barrier-free to ensure that persons can travel from their homes to their chosen pick-up point. Training should be provided for drivers to help them become aware of the needs of",,,

Persons with Disabilities.Â,,,

For details regarding accessible bus stops refer to Section 10.3.Â,,,

11.7.1.2 Accessible buses Accessible buses should have the following features:Â,,,

Bus doors should be at least 1200 mm wide;Â,,,

Should be low floor;Â,,,

Have handrail and footlight installed; andÂ,,,

Have apparatus such as a hydraulic lift or pullout/foldable ramp (Figure 11-7) installed in the doorway for mobility aided users/ prams.Â,,,

Wheelchair spacesÂ,,,

- Space for a wheelchair should be provided in an appropriate position, without preventing other passengers from getting on and off (Figure 11-8);Â - The location of that space should be as indicated, inside and outside the bus, using the",,,

standard symbol for wheelchair accessibility; andÂ,,,

- Wheel stoppers and wheelchair safety belts should be provided,,,

Alighting BuzzersÂ,,,

- An appropriate number of alighting buzzers should be provided in positions that are easily accessible for seated or standing passengers; andÂ,,,

- The push button of an alighting buzzer should be clearly visible; of adequate size, installed at 900 mm to 1200 mm from the bus floor level and display the information in Braille/raised numbers as well.Â",,,

Information SignsÂ,,,

- Information on the names of all stops along a bus route should be indicated inside the bus by displaying the text in a suitable position; andÂ,,,

- Information on a route and its final destination should be displayed outside the bus in large text, especially on the front and side of the bus. This information should be in a bright contrasting colour and be well illuminated be an external light to",,,

make it readable in the dark.â€​,,,

(Emphasis supplied),,,

The guidelines harmonise standards and ensure equality for persons with disabilities and elderly persons as is evident from their title.,,,

Judicial Precedents,,,

Bus transportation system constitutes a large part of traffic in Delhi. It has been the subject matter of consideration from several critical aspects by the Supreme Court of India and this court. Before dealing with the factual background,",,,

we extract hereunder in chronological order the law on the subject in judicial pronouncements.,,,

The aspect of control and regulation of the traffic as well as consequential issues of public safety in the NCT of Delhi as well as the National Capital Region of Delhi are of paramount concern therefore, within the ambit of the right to life",,,

guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India was the subject matter of writ petition being W.P.(C)No.13029/1985, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India wherein series of orders were passed by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court",,,

was also concerned with the impact of vehicular pollution on environmental degradation. This writ petition being W.P.(C)No.13029/1985 was clubbed with W.P.(C)No.939/1996, both entitled M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors. Realising the",,,

urgency and importance of protection and improvement of the environment, in these writ petitions the court had given direction from time to time impressing upon the authorities to take urgent steps to tackle the problem of vehicular pollution in",,,

Delhi. 31. Another order passed on 28th July, 1998 which came to be reported at (1998) 6 SCC 63, the court noted in para 1 that assurances had been held out to the court through various affidavits filed by the competent officers of the Govt.",,,

of NCT of Delhi, that “effective steps shall be taken in a phased manner with a specified time-spanâ€. It was observed by the court that “in spite of the matter having engaged the attention of this court for a long time and lengthy",,,

debates on each hearing, precious little appears to have been done by the State Administration to check and control the vehicular pollutionâ€. The court noted that then vehicular pollution contributed to 70% of air pollution, as per the",,,

White Paper by the Government of India as compared to 20% in 1970. No concrete steps had been taken as proposed in the White Paper which had the deadline of 1st April, 1998.",,,

In para 3, the court had noted the following measures proposed by the Committee headed by Shri Bhure Lal, with the time frame in its action report filed before the Supreme Court :",,,

 ""3. xxx   xxx   xxx",,,

Time-frame,,,

(A) Augmentation of public transport 1-4-2001 (stage carriage) to 10,000 buses.",,,

(Emphasis by us),,,

So far as the above time frame to ensure the above was concerned, in para 4, the court had directed as follows :",,,

“4. We approve the directions given and the time-frame fixed by Shri Bhure Lal Committee. The time-frame, as fixed by that Committee and today by this Court, in consultation with learned counsel for the parties, shall be strictly adhered",,,

to by all the authorities who shall also take effective and adequate steps to bring to the notice of the public, both through print and electronic media, various directions issued by this Court from time to time in general and the directions",,,

hereinabove contained in particular. Report in this behalf shall be filed in the Court within four weeks. We administer a strong caution to all concerned that failure to abide by any of the directions hereinabove noticed would invite action under,,,

the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the defaulters.â€​",,,

(Emphasis by us),,,

In one of the orders reported at (1997) 8 SCC 770 M.C Mehta v. Union of India, the court had observed that “the control and regulation of traffic in NCR and NCT, Delhi, is a matter of paramount public safety and, therefore, is",,,

evidently within the ambit of Art. 21 of the Constitution†and therefore it was the “obligation of this court under Article 32 of the Constitution†which was invoked with aid of Article 142 to give the necessary directions which were being,,,

given in the court.Â,,,

It appears that the Delhi High Court was also concerned with the impact of the influx of light and heavy vehicular traffic with the tremendous increase in population making roads of Delhi increasingly dangerous to human lives. Mr. Jai,,,

Dehadrai, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the matter of public safety, reduction of road accidents as well as the State responsibility of ensuring that it was disabled friendly.",,,

Suo motu cognizance of these issues was taken in the matter which was registered as W.P.(C)No.16565/2006 registered as Court on its Own Motion v. Union of India which was being heard along with W.P.(Crl.)No.207/2004. In this,,,

regard, the decision of the court rendered on 26th March, 2007 which has been reported at 139 (2007) DLT 244 : 2007 (96) DRJ 580, Court on its Own Motion v. Union of India & Ors. has been placed before us. It would be appropriate to",,,

refer to the submissions made by the Delhi Transport Corporation with regard to the manner in which the occurrence of accidents could be reduced. We extract hereunder the submissions noted by the court and the observations made in,,,

paras 29 to 31 and 37 hereunder :,,,

“29. It was commonly conceded before us that in order to reduce accidents particularly by buses, the DTC buses and/or the buses plying in Delhi under the permits issued by the State Transport Authority, will be the buses where the seat of",,,

the driver is on a lower floor. These will be low floor buses having a bigger front screen. The recommendation of the Committee in this regard reads as under:,,,

Revised Standards for Bus Body : It was noted that standards with respect to bus body specifications were notified on 16.9.05. The attendees decided that suitable changes would be made to ensure that the standards were compatible with,,,

international practices and designs, by positioning the driver in a sufficiently advantageous position at a lower level and with greater visibility. Such changes would be approved by the Central Motor Vehicles Rules Technical Standing",,,

Committee, and notified within three months for all four types of heavy passenger vehicles, i.e. Medium and High Capacity buses, intra- urban buses, long distance buses, and special purpose buses (school buses, sleepers and tourist buses).",,,

For goods vehicles, similar steps would be initiated in due course. Until the new standards are notified, all type approvals would be suspended in Delhi, as per the order of the Delhi High Court directing that no new purchase orders were to be",,,

made. It was pointed out that the Delhi Transport Corporation had already invited tenders for 625 new buses (or modern design). These buses were as per the new bus code -having a low floor (390 mm floor height), pneumatic doors, rear",,,

engine, tubeless tyres, low driver seating, and enhanced upward and downward visibility for driver. The price bid is set to open on the 5th of February. This is a re-tender, involving three bidders 'Leyland, Tata, and a Chinese company. Unlike",,,

the existing stock of buses of DTC, these buses are chassis and body together. The earlier buses have a body fabricated on a chassis. The new fleet of buses will be disabled friendly, with place for two wheelchairs. The Chairman of DTC",,,

was contacted, and he gave details of the new buses to be purchased. He also undertook to abide by the new revised bus code if such a code was brought into operation before the date of manufacture of the newly ordered buses. The",,,

Chairman also stated that 2500 regular drivers were being recruited by DTC. The conditions of recruitment of these drivers required them to be 10th pass and a 2 year probation period was mandated. Thus, the DTC was fully cognizant of the",,,

changes required in bus bodies, and in driver recruitment practices, and was making a concerted effort to bring in improved practices. In view of this, a modification of the direction of the High Court may be sought to enable purchase of these",,,

buses by DTC. Further, under the current tender, DTC retains the option to buy additional buses within a specified period. The purchase of those buses would be as per the new bus code' as and when it comes into effect.",,,

The Government of NCT of Delhi while agreeing with the above recommendation, has also stated that action for revision of bus body standards is being taken up by the concerned ministries and final bid for purchase of 625 low floor CNG",,,

buses has already been opened and further steps are in progress. Due instructions have been given to the State Transport Authority and Registration Authorities not to register buses, which do not have low floor.",,,

We are happy to note the information given by the Delhi Transport Corporation that they had introduced 5 low floor buses in November, 2005 and one bus was added in November, 2006. Over a period of more than 2 years, none of these",,,

buses have reported any fatal accident and in fact they have not met with any accident. Therefore, we direct that in Delhi, all local buses by whomsoever they are running under permit or otherwise, shall be low floor buses and only such",,,

vehicles will be registered by the authorities. This will also be a condition in the permit issued by the State Transport Authority.â€​,,,

Delhi is a growing city and is a city of international importance. It is not only desirable but necessary that various bus-stands and other places including the buses are disabled-friendly. There was unanimity between the counsel appearing,,,

for different parties as well as the report filed before us that the bus-stands should be made disabledfriendly and due provisions should be made for disabled persons to board the buses without any inconvenience or difficulty. This is a clear,,,

obligation on the part of the State. All the bus stands should be improved and without offending any rules, they must be made disabled-friendly with requisite facilities. The Court on 25.1.2007 had passed the order in regard to construction of",,,

disabled-friendly buses and bus stops and the relevant portion whereof reads as under:,,,

We have heard the amices curiae Mr. Gopal Subramanyam, learned ASG of India. We are happy to note that the matters have progressed. He may file the proposals which he had discussed and proposed to various authorities on record within",,,

two days from today and provide copy thereof to the counsel appearing for different authorities/ organizations.,,,

It is stated that the proposals for the buses with a new frame/ models to bring the driver seat at a lower level as well as to ensure that same are easily accessible to a disabled person, have been accepted by the authorities concerned but",,,

obviously they need some time to finalize the same. It is in the interest of the Administration that the new buses are not purchased by any of the Corporations who are having route permits to run buses for mass-,,,

transportation in Delhi till the next date of hearing which, in any case, is four days ahead....â€​",,,

(Emphasis supplied),,,

The above extract shows the considered view of the Delhi Government and DTC that low floor buses which have a bigger front screen, are essential to reduce accidents that is from the safety aspect. It is also noteworthy that learned",,,

ASG had referred to change of bus body and design. Â,,,

In para 30, the Division Bench has noted the submissions of the Government of NCT of Delhi that “due instructions have been given to the State Transport Authority and registration authorities not to register buses which do not have a",,,

low floorâ€​. Â,,,

In para 31, the Division Bench has clearly directed that “in Delhi all local buses by whomsoever they are running under permit or otherwise, shall be low floor buses and only such vehicles will be registered by the authorities. This will",,,

also condition in the permit issued by the State Transport Authorityâ€​. The directions in para 39 regarding clearance of roads and parking etc. were to effectuate these conditions.,,,

It is noteworthy that the judgment dated 26th March, 2007 was not assailed by the Government of NCT of Delhi or the DTC, and has attained finality and the directions made by the court bind these authorities as well as the present",,,

consideration.  Â,,,

It appears that K.R. Mangalam World School filed a Special Leave Petition, which was registered as Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.7528/2007 entitled K.R. Mangalam v. Union of India & Ors. Some other petitioners being SLP",,,

Nos.7529/2007, 7546/2007, 10090/2007, 10229/2007, 10546/2007, 12089/2008, 18345/2008, 23689/2008 and 2007/2008 were taken up alongwith by the court on 12th August, 2015.Â",,,

SLP(C)Nos.7528/2007 and 7546/2007 were dismissed for default of appearance.,,,

The following order was recorded on 12th August, 2015 in the SLP(C)No.10090/2007 :",,,

“SLP(C)No.10090/2007:Â,,,

This Special Leave Petition is filed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C )No.16565 of 2006, dated 26.03.2007.Â",,,

At the time of hearing of this Special Leave Petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner very fairly brings to our notice the subsequent amendment that has taken place in the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 ('the Rules' for",,,

short). The said Rules reads as under :Â,,,

“2. In the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (hereafter referred as the said rules), in rule 125C, for sub-rule (1), the following shall be substituted, namely:-Â",,,

“(1) On and after the 1st day of October, 2014, the testing and approval for body building of new models of buses with seating capacity of 13 or more passengers excluding driver shall be in accordance with AIR:052 (Revision 1)-2008, as",,,

amended from time to time, for vehicles mentioned therein, till the correspondent BIS specifications are notified under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 (63 of 1986):â€​Â",,,

In view of the aforesaid amendment, the learned counsel states that, as of now, the relief sought for by the petitioner does not survive for consideration and decision by this Court.Â",,,

Taking note of the statement so made by the learned counsel, the Special Leave Petition is disposed of as having become infructuous.â€​",,,

SLP(C)Nos.7529/2007, 10229/2007, 23689/2008 and 207/2008 were dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. Â",,,

SLP(C) Nos. 10546/2007, 12089/2008 and 18345/2008, were delinked from the batch petitions. We have not been informed about the outcome thereof. Â",,,

In (2016) 7 SCC 761, Jeeja Ghosh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., the Supreme Court has categorically and succinctly highlighted the fact that the persons with disability must be treated with utmost dignity.",,,

Rajive Raturi, a visually disabled person, a resident of Gurgaon who works in Delhi with a human rights organization filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 243/2005 in public interest in the Supreme Court of India on behalf of differently",,,

abled persons seeking proper and adequate access to public places. In other words, he sought provisions of all accessibility requirements to make all visually disabled persons in support of “safe access to roads and transport facilitiesâ€​.Â",,,

The writ petitioner stated that there were 60-70 million disabled people in India out of which 50% suffer from visual disability. The fundamental concern of these persons was accessibility to rights and transport and safe accessibility to,,,

movements on footpaths and accessibility to roads and transport. The writ petition raised fundamental concerns of accessibility to the disabled pointing out the internationally acceptable mandatory components of physical accessibility i.e. the,,,

safety, independence, affordability, logical layout. We extract hereafter the relevant components :",,,

“a) Safety: the environment must be such where disabled people can move around safely.,,,

b) Independence: the environment must be such where disabled persons can use the facilities independently.,,,

c) Affordability: the barrier free or accessible environment should not come with a premium.,,,

d) Logical layout: the environment must be such where disabled persons are able to navigate without too much physical exertion i.e. not having to move to the length and breadth of the building to access information or make use of the,,,

facilities.â€​,,,

This writ petition was decided on 15th December, 2017 along with W.P.(C)No.228/2006Â by a detailed judgment reported at (2018) 2 SCC 413, Rajive Raturi v. Union of India & Ors.Â",,,

In para 4, the court noted that in international human rights law, equality is founded upon two complementary principles, nondiscrimination and reasonable differentiation. The principle of nondiscrimination seeks to ensure that all",,,

persons can equally enjoy and exercise all their rights and freedoms. Discrimination occurs due to arbitrary denial of opportunities for equal participation. For example, when public facilities and services are set on standards out of the reach",,,

of persons with disabilities, it leads to exclusion and denial of rights.",,,

In para 6 of Rajive Raturi, the court held as follows :",,,

“6. Two major declarations on the disabled were adopted by the General Assembly in that decade. First is the declaration on the rights of mentally retarded persons dated 20-12-1971 which provided that the mentally retarded person should,,,

enjoy the same rights as other human beings, including the right to proper medical care, economic security, the right to training and rehabilitation, and the right to live with his own family or with foster parents. Furthermore, the Assembly",,,

“Sl.No,Targets set under AIC,"Petitioner’s

remarks",Action taken

xxx                          Â

xxx                          Â

xxx",,,

7.,"10%

        Â

of",No standards and,"Ministry of Road,

,"Government

o w n e d public

transport carriers are

to be made

fully

accessible

by     Â

March

2018.","guidelines at

present are

available to make

Government

owned public

transport carriers

accessible.","Transport and

Highways has

issued

instructions to

the States and

Executive

Director of

organisations of

State

undertakings to

ensure that 10%

of Government

owned Public

Transport is

made fully

accessible to the

PWDs by

March 2018.

Classes,,,

First

                                                                                      Â

step

                                                                                     Â

from ground ‘D’","Max.

        Â

height

(mm)",,

,Min. depth (mm),,

Other steps ‘E’,"Max.

        Â

height

(mm)",,

,"Min.

         Â

height

(mm)",,

,Min. depth (mm),,

S.No.,"Cabinet Decision

No. & Date",DecisionÂ,Action Taken by DTC

1.,"1933, 17.09.2012",625 Non-AC Low,Tender floated by DTC

,,"Floor CNG buses with

AMC","on 20.03.2013 for 500

Non-AC and 125 AC

Low Floor buses. Single

bid was

received for 500 NonAC

and no bid was received

for 125 AC buses. The

cost of the Non-AC bus

and AMC charges were

unrealistic,

exorbitantly high,

unreasonable &

unjustifiable. Tender

was, therefore, scrapped.

2.,"1946, 22.10.2012",,"The specifications of the

buses viz-a-viz JNNURM

could not be finalized and

the matter was again put

up to Council of

Ministers.

3.,"2086, 03.10.2013","Â Â 1380

        Â

Non-AC

Standard Floor (900

mm) CNG buses with

AMC and 345 AC

Low Floor (400 mm)

Premium Segment

with AMC","Tenders were floated on

04.10.2013 for 1380

Standard Floor and 345

Low Floor Premium

Segment buses. Single

bid was received for

standard floor buses. No

bid was received for

Premium Segment.

Tender was foreclosed

due to conditional

Techno-Commercial

Bid of single bidder in

respect of 1380

,,,"Standard Floor Buses, as

such, Price Bid was not

opened.

Â,Â,Â,"Tender was again floated

on 30.06.2014 for 1380

standard (900 mm) floor

height NonAC buses.

Single bid was received.

The cost of the bus and the

AMC charges were still

high. Tender was

foreclosed on

23.04.2015.

and mobility. We had permitted him to be impleaded as petitioner no.4.,,,

By our order dated 2nd April, 2018, we had again directed that the respondents shall place before this court the study/reports, if any, available or obtained by them with regard to the procurement of buses (low floor as well as standard",,,

floor) before the next date of hearing.Â,,,

No such document is forthcoming.,,,

On the 14th of May 2018, Mr. Jai Dehadrai, ld. counsel for the petitioner had made a strong opposition with regard to the proposal of the respondents to acquire standard floor buses inter alia on grounds of safety concerns as well.Â",,,

However, this submission could not be examined as time was sought on behalf of the Government of NCT of Delhi to file its response to the petitioner’s affidavit. Â",,,

On the 14th of May 2018, we had noted the submissions of Mr. Aman Panwar, ld. counsel, who appears for the petitioner no.3, who had drawn our attention to the minutes of the third meeting of the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC)",,,

Board held on 27th June, 2013 wherein inter alia the following decision was taken Â",,,

“(b) AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION :,,,

The TRC recommended for Automatic Transmission in place of Manual Transmission after due consideration of the following :,,,

(i) Automatic or Automatic Manual Transmission System mandatory from 1st April, 2015.",,,

(ii) DTC’s new fleet of 3775 Low Floor Buses with Automatic Transmission System already operating. (iii) Drivers have become attuned to Automatic Transmission System.,,,

(iv) Automatic Transmission System most comfortable Transmission System for drivers.,,,

(v) DTC experience of frequent breakdowns in Manual Transmission in respect of clutch & pressure plates, propeller shafts and U-joints, gear box faults etc in Standard Buses due to non-using of clutch while changing gears and clutch riding",,,

by drivers.,,,

(vi) Driver’s fatigue due to frequent clutching and declutching while changing gears in Delhi congested traffic conditions.,,,

(vii) Automatic Transmission is superior technology in comparison to Manual Transmission already adopted by the Corporation, as such, cost may not be the sole criteria when the buses in question are being purchased and to be maintained for",,,

a period of 12 years specifically when it adds to driver’s comfort and fatigueless driving for comparatively better safety of passengers.,,,

(viii) At the time of tendering for Low Floor CNG Buses in the past, the VMs were not ready with the technology. However, the Corporation went ahead with procurement of Low Floor CNG buses with Automatic Transmission and both",,,

the VMs were able to deliver 3775 Buses to the Corporation.,,,

(ix) The VMs are required to design, manufacture & develop prototype Standard Bus fitted with Automatic Transmission for Type Approval as per the requirements of the Corporation involving large quantity of buses.",,,

(c)Â Â SUSPENSION SYSTEMÂ :,,,

The TRC noted that as per Recommendatory Urban Bus Specifications II, any bus delivered after 1st April’ 2015 will mandatorily have Air Suspension or Superior in both front & rear. Keeping in view jerk less comfortable bus journey",,,

& comfortable ride for the passengers and this feature has already been adopted by the Corporation in 3775 Low Floor Buses, Air-Suspension may be provided on all wheels.â€​",,,

(Emphasis by us),,,

Mr. Aman Panwar, ld. counsel for the petitioner no.3 had pointed out that the Delhi Transport Corporation had in the decision dated 27th June, 2013 effectively accepted that the specifications of the Ministry of Urban Development are of",,,

binding effect.Â,,,

It was further pointed out by Mr. Aman Panwar, ld. counsel for the petitioner no.3 that the “Recommendatory Urban Bus Specifications II†of the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India binds the procurement of any",,,

buses by the Delhi Transport Corporation and that the efforts to procure the standard floor buses are in contravention of the said specifications of the Ministry of Urban Developmentâ€.  121. In view of these imperatives which had to be,,,

considered before procurement of buses, on the 14th of May 2018, Mr. Anand Grover, ld. Senior Counsel for the GNCTD as well as the DTC had assured this court that “no contract will be awarded so far as the acquisition of standard",,,

floor buses is concerned till the next date of hearingâ€​. We had directed that the respondents shall remain bound by this statement. This submission has continued till date. Â,,,

We may note that detailed affidavits have been filed by M/s Tata Motors Ltd. as well as M/s Ashok Leyland. Inasmuch as we are yet to hear the official respondents on these affidavits, we are desisting from making any comment",,,

thereon.,,,

We may note that on the 30th of May 2018, we had recorded the following order :",,,

“1. Time is sought on behalf of the respondents to place before this court, on affidavit, the timelines within which the public transport system in Delhi, which includes the bus fleet maintained by the Delhi Transport Corporation, shall be made",,,

disabled friendly. Let the same be done forthwith.,,,

The respondents shall also place before this court on affidavit the timelines within which the bus stops/stands/shelters shall be made disabled friendly as well as the necessary repairs/renovations as are necessary to the roads to enable,,,

effective usage thereof for plying disabled friendly buses as well as enabling their use by the disabled. Undertakings of compliance shall be filed in the affidavit.,,,

It is trite that all parties are bound to comply with the judgments of the Supreme Court of this court and the provisions of the special law i.e. the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.",,,

We make it clear that, if we permit the acquisition of 2,000 standard floor buses, as proposed by the respondents for rural Delhi, it shall be only as an interim measure and a stop gap arrangement pending completion of all necessary steps for",,,

making the transport system disabled friendly. Â,,,

The respondents are categorical before us that roads in rural Delhi are in dire condition and that there are no effective public transport available in rural Delhi.,,,

List on 1st June, 2018.â€​",,,

(Emphasis supplied),,,

The above order has not been complied with. No time line regarding procurement of accessible transport is placed.,,,

Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Additional Standing Counsel for the Government of NCT of Delhi has drawn our attention to a Cabinet Decision No.2579 dated 18th May, 2018 which takes note of our dated 14th May, 2018. In order to appreciate",,,

which transpired in the meeting, it is necessary to extract the Cabinet decision in extenso which reads as follows :",,,

“GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI,,,

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT,,,

(CO-ORDINATION BRANCH),,,

DELHI SECRETARIAT, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHIÂ",,,

No.F.3/3/2018/GAD/CN/2052-2062 Dated: 21/5/2018,,,

CABINET DECISION NO.2579 DATED 18.05.2018,,,

Subject:Â Award of Concessions to the bidders of Clusters Nos.13,14 (part), 16A and 16B for which bidding was carried out by the Transport Department in pursuance to Cabinet Decisions dated 01.09.2017 and 09.01.2018.",,,

Decision: The Council of Ministers, in the meeting held on 15.05.2018, was apprised by Department of Transport (DOT) that through bidding process, companies have been selected for induction of 1000 CNG standard floor buses under",,,

Cluster Scheme. Once the Agreements are signed with the said companies and contracts awarded, supply of these buses is expected to start from September, 2018. All these 1000 buses are expected to be on the roads of Delhi by end of",,,

April, 2019.",,,

Attention of the Council of Ministers was drawn to the order of the Hon’ble High Court dated 14.05.2018 in W.P.(C). 9643/2017 titled “Nipun Malhotra vs. GNCTD & Ors.â€​,,,

The Council of Ministers, being concerned about the observations made by the Hon’ble High Court, deferred the decision on this item of the agenda on 15.05.2018 and directed DOT to explore the feasibility of acquisition of law floor buses",,,

and to revert to the Council of Ministers for consideration at the next meeting.Â,,,

DOT made inquiries with the established suppliers of law floor buses as to the time lines within which such buses can be supplied and feasibility of acquisition of the same and towards this end. DOT scheduled a meeting on 16.05.2018 with,,,

M/s Tata Motors Ltd., M/s Ashok Leyland Ltd. and M/s JBM. At this meeting, the manufacturers apprised DOT that at the present moment, there was no type approval of low floor CNG buses from the approved agency in accordance with",,,

the provisions of the CMVR and that a period of approximately nine months would be required for obtaining type approval from the date of award of contract. Further, DOT apprised the Council of Ministers that in view of the fact that the",,,

manufacturers do not have type approval in place for CNG low floor buses and keeping in mind the time which will be taken to finalise the Tenders and issue NIT, it will take around 1.5-2 years before the supply of low floor CNG buses can",,,

start.,,,

The Council of Ministers noted that no public transport buses tender has been awarded by GNCTD since 2011 and there is acute shortage of buses. Global Tenders floated twice by DTC in March 2013 (Low Floor Buses) and June 2014,,,

(Standard Floor Buses) failed because of exorbitant price quoted for AMC / Buses. If buses are not added immediately and public transport not strengthened then commuters will gradually shift to private transport which will lead to more,,,

congestion on roads and increase in pollution levels in Delhi.Â,,,

The Council of Ministers directs DOT to immediately initiate the process for procurement of additional 2000 low floor buses. As DOT informs that it will take more than two years before the low floor buses start arriving, therefore, if the",,,

present procurement of standard floor buses is cancelled and no buses are procured for a further period of two years, it would adversely impact public transport in Delhi.Â",,,

Resolved that, given the acquisition of 1000 CNG standard floor buses was being undertaken primarily to replenish the existing fleet and already the National Capital Territory of Delhi is facing severe shortage of buses and any further delay",,,

will have adverse impact on public transport, the Council of Ministers approves the proposal of the DOT for 1000 CNG standard floor buses, as contained in para-7 of the Cabinet Note. However, the contracts will be awarded only after",,,

clearance from the Hon’ble High Court in WP(C) 9643/2017 and permission of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of M/s. AB Grains Spirits Private Limited (SLP No.5512/2018) and M/s. Jay Madhok Holding Private,,,

Limited (SLP No.5513/2018). The extant factual position and the urgency in securing this Standard Floor Bus fleet in larger public interest should be informed to the Hon’ble High Court.Â,,,

--Sd/--,,,

(Anshu Prakash),,,

Secretary to the Cabinet,,,

Dated: 21/5/2018â€​,,,

This decision of the Cabinet of the Government of NCT of Delhi completely fails to even advert to the binding Indian obligations under the International Convention and the provisions of the enactment of 2016. It also fails to take any,,,

notice of the binding directives as well as of this court which have to be complied with.Â,,,

Even as on 21st May, 2018, the Department of Transport was directed to “explore the feasibility of acquisition of low floor busesâ€. It is stated to have also undertaken limited inquiries with three bus manufacturers. Given the size",,,

of the order and number of buses which have to be procured, in order to comport to the law, a more detailed examination was required to be undertaken.Â",,,

Before us, it is being stated that the three bus suppliers had stated that obtaining type approval of low floor CNG buses from the approved agencies would require a period of approximately nine months. Considering the fact that more",,,

than two decades have passed since the Supreme Court has been concerned with the matter, nine months for obtaining the approval and “1.5 to 2 yearsâ€​ before the supply of low CNG bus can start seems trivial.",,,

The decision to press and go ahead for standard floor buses rests on the consideration that since 2011, no public transport bus tender has been awarded by GNCTD.Â",,,

This only reflects the lack of concern that the public transport system. Such negligence can nowhere enable an authority to ignore the right to equality and non-discrimination of persons with disability as well as elder persons.Â,,,

It is to be noted that the Cabinet decision still ignores the fact that even acquisition of buses would be immaterial unless bus stands, stations and roads were modulated/rectified or constructed to enable mobility to the disabled and access to",,,

the public transport system. The above narration shows that we have not even begun conversations in this regard.,,,

This decision also reflects no real intention to acquire accessible transport in Delhi. The first writ petition is pending since September, 2017. We have called upon the respondents repeatedly to place their proposals for procuring",,,

accessible transport. In almost eight months, the respondents have taken no steps to even commence the planning, let alone the tendering process. It is noteworthy that, in comparison the respondents are undertaking herculean efforts to",,,

procure the standard floor buses. Procuring of low floor buses by the respondents, therefore, seems to be a very remote possibility. It is certainly at the bottom of their priorities.",,,

Procuring buses which are inaccessible to the disabled infracts the mandate of the Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act, 2016 and the imperative and repeated directions of the Supreme Court not only is completely impermissible but",,,

also reflects callous apathy and gross indifference to environmental degradation as well as infringement of rights of the citizens of Delhi, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, to a clean and healthy environment. The actions of the",,,

respondents are in complete violation of the 'Harmonious Guidelines and Space Standards for Barrier Free Built Environment for Persons with Disabilities and Elder Persons’. It is also in violation of the right to road safety of the,,,

residents of Delhi as admitted by the respondents decades ago. The same is violative of the imperative directions of the Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta; Rajive Raturi and of this court in Court on its own Motion.,,,

Insistence on making only 10% of the bus fleet disabled friendly â€" highly improper and legally impermissible,,,

It is unfortunate that in para A (viii) of its submissions, the Delhi Transport Corporation has yet again insisted that at Sr.No.7 of para 26 of Rajive Raturi, the Supreme Court had stated that only 10% of government owned public transport",,,

carriers have to be made fully accessible by March, 2018. Â",,,

So far as total fleet of DTC and cluster buses is concerned, the respondent no.4 has explained that total fleet of DTC and cluster buses is about 5,400 out of which 3,781 buses is low floor (disabled friendly).  136. The respondent no.4",,,

calculates that with the procurement of another 2,000 buses, the bus fleet would be 7,400 buses. It is submitted that keeping in view the Government of India guidelines, only 10% of the buses have to be low floor buses which would mean",,,

only 740 buses, which is much lower than the low floor buses (3,781) owned by the Government, at present.",,,

We have extracted above, the clear mandate of the pronunciation of the Supreme Court in Rajive Raturi v. Union of India & Ors. It is to be noted that this position is a grave misreading of the judgment. Para 26 of Rajive Raturi only",,,

extracts the submissions of the Government of India in its affidavit. The directions of the court are contained in para 34 of the judgment. Â,,,

The submissions on behalf of the respondents and their efforts to procure standard floor buses either by the DTC or in their cluster scheme is in complete violation of the directives of the Supreme Court. As noted above, this submission",,,

also ignores completely the requirement of the law as laid down in the Rights of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.",,,

During the course of hearing, we had queried from Dr. Dhruv Mehta, learned Senior Counsel for the DTC as well as Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Addl. Standing Counsel for the Government of NCT of Delhi that if the court was to accept the",,,

submission that the respondents were only required to make 10% of the bus fleet accessible to the disabled and they were permitted to do so, how such 10% would be operated and how the disabled would know when a bus which was",,,

accessible to them was available? There was, of course, no answer forthcoming, as there can be none.",,,

There is no disability census available or a census in terms of geographic distribution of the disabled population at all for the respondents to undertake any meaningful planning or rationalisation, if the same was legally permissible, which it",,,

clearly is not.,,,

Accepting the submission that only 10% of the buses are required to be made disabled friendly would mean endorsement of the position that the disabled could follow no employment schedules.  Their entire schedules are to be,,,

governed by the schedule of the 10% accessible public transport which the DTC and the respondents are willing to provide.,,,

The respondents have failed to furnish any timelines before us. it is to be noted that W.P.(C) No. 9643/2017 has been pending since September, 2017 more than eight months ago. The order was passed by the Supreme Court on 15th",,,

December, 2017 and more than six months have passed thereafter. The Government of NCT of Delhi has made no steps at all to comply with the directions made by the court. We have no authority or jurisdiction to modify these",,,

directions or the judgments of the Supreme Court. Â,,,

The respondents are in fact intending that we permit them to buy standard floor buses in violation of the orders of the Supreme Court. We would be committing contempt of the orders thereby.,,,

The directions by the Supreme Court with regard to the environment concerns in (1998) 6 SCC 63, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors., also bind the respondents.",,,

This submission shows that the respondents are bent upon treating the disabled as non-existent, or, in any case not having any rights. The respondents have not even conceptualized, let alone, bothered to take a single step toward",,,

ensuring accessible transport in Delhi. Â,,,

This submission (that only ten percent of the buses have to be disabled friendly) in fact underlines the reluctance of the respondents to acquire accessible transport and to comply with the law.,,,

In view thereof, even if we direct waiver of the assurance given by Mr. Anand Grover, Senior Counsel, who appeared for DTC as well as GNCTD, on the 14th of May 2018, the respondents are prohibited from acquiring any standard",,,

floor buses by the pronouncements of the Supreme Court of India; of this court as well as the statutory mandate contained in the ‘Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016’ as well as by the 'Harmonious Guidelines and Space",,,

Standards for Barrier Free Built Environment for Persons with Disabilities and Elder Persons’ which bind the respondents.,,,

In the light of the detailed narration of the law on the subject, the respondents shall stand precluded from procuring any standard floor buses.",,,

List for further hearing on 16th July, 2018.",,,

Dasti to parties.,,,