Dismissed

Fight for Human Rights v. Indian Red Cross Society and Anr.

Delhi HC15 Mar 2019W.P.(C)/2556/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ directions to hold blood donation camps and claim compensation. Court held respondents are Non-Government Organisations not amenable to writ jurisdiction, dismissed petition as frivolous, and imposed costs.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with costs of Rs. 25,000/- to be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.

Fight for Human Rights Vs Indian Red Cross Society… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~36

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 2556/2019

¶4

FIGHT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Ms K. R. Chitra, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R % 15.03.2019

¶9

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that the respondents be directed to initiate steps to hold Voluntary Blood Donation Camp in the near future on receiving request from the petitioner organization. The petitioner further prays that the respondents be directed to provide reasonable compensation to the petitioner for their failure to conduct the camp on 28.02.2019 and 13.03.2019 respectively.

¶10

The petitioner, who appears in person, had requested respondent no.1 (Indian Red Cross Society) to hold a Blood Donation Camp on Tis Hazari Court on 28.02.2019. She has also drew the attention of this Court to an email dated 04.02.2019 sent by respondent no.1 indicating that its team would reach Tis Hazari Court at 10:30 AM alongwith the mobile bus. The petitioner was also requested to arrange for parking of the bus alongwith a power point, a table and a chair for registration. Concededly, the team reached the Tis Hazari Court Complex at 11:00 AM, however, the

¶11

arrangement was not made and the mobile bus could not be parked.

¶12

In the circumstances, it is clear that it is the failure on the part of the petitioner to make necessary arrangement that had frustrated the holding of the Blood Donation Camp.

¶13

Insofar as respondent no.2 (Rotary Blood Bank) is concerned, by an email dated 01.03.2019, respondent no.2 had sought permission for holding the Blood Donation Camp on 12.03.2019 from 10:15 AM to 4:00 PM. There is no material on record to indicate that the necessary permissions were taken and communicated to respondent no.2.

¶14

In any view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the respondents are Non-Government Organisations and are not amenable to writ jurisdiction. The present petition is frivolous and unmerited. It is, accordingly, dismissed with costs of ₹25,000/-. The cost shall be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of two weeks from today.

¶15

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

¶16

MARCH 15, 2019 MK

Fight for Human Rights v. Indian Red Cross Society and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fight for Human Rights v. Indian Red Cross Society and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar & Ors. Vs President - Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Management Committee & Ors.

Prem Bhardwaj Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Amar Agarwal and Anr. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Deepak Dhull and Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Vikas Vij and Anr. Vs Reserve Bank of India and Ors.

Ex. Const./Gd Ajay Veer Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Vijay Gupta Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Vikas Ecotech Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Deepak Dhull and Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Dr. Hari Prasad Chhetri Vs Union of India & Anr.

Prabhatam Advertisement Pvt. Ltd. through Its Authorized Reprentative Vs Delhi Metro Rail Transport Corporation Ltd.

Rain Cii Carbon (Vizag) Ltd. and Anr. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Vinod Kumar Dandona Vs Union of India and Ors.

Pardeep Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.