Disposed

Dinmani Sharma v. Principal District and Sessions Judge & Ors.

Delhi HC12 Sept 2024W.P.(C)/11154/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court disposed of a petition regarding the allotment of chambers to a petitioner claiming status as a person with disability. The Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's pending representation and convey a decision within the framework of law.

What did the court decide?

The petition and connected applications were disposed of with a direction to consider the petitioner's representation regarding allotment of a chamber under the disability quota.

Dinmani Sharma Vs Principal District and Sessions Judge… — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~14

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 11154/2024 & CM APPLs. 46097/2024, 46098/2024

¶4

DINMANI SHARMA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Ajayinder Sangwan, Mr. Summinder, Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Siddharth Gill, Mr. Smit Singh Kuru, Mr. Achyut Dwivedi, Mr. Deepak Sherawat, Ms. Pinki Kumari and Mr. Kunal Chopra, Advocates with Petitioner (in-Person).

¶6

versus

¶7

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE & ORS.

¶8

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Udit Malik, ASC (Civil) with Mr. Vishal Chanda, Advocate.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶11

O R D E R % 12.09.2024

¶12

On 12^th August, 2024, the Court had noted the background of the case which is as follows:

¶13

1. At the outset, counsel for Petitioner states that no relief is being sought against Respondent No. 4, Bar Council of Delhi. Accordingly, on his oral request, Respondent No. 4 is deleted from the array of parties. Let amended memo of parties be filed within one week from today.

¶14

2. Chamber No. G-711, Karkardooma Court Complex¹ , was allotted to one Mr. Dharam Diwakar² , who unfortunately deceased on 05^th February, 2022. The Petitioner, who is the sister of the Allottee, also a

¶15

1 “the Chamber”

¶16

2 “the Allotee”

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/09/2024 at 11:55:08

¶19

practising advocate, has also been using the Chamber. She contends the wife of the Allottee has already re-married, and the Petitioner has adopted the only son of her deceased brother. In such circumstances, the Petitioner asserts that she is the surviving heir of the Allottee, being his only unmarried sister, and accordingly has sought transfer of the Chamber in her name through an application filed on 28^th April, 2022. The said application has been rejected vide impugned order dated 4^th July, 2024, and the Petitioner has been directed to vacate the Chamber.

¶20

3. Apart from asserting her right as the sister of the Allottee, Petitioner urges that she has a right to retain the Chamber on the ground of her being a person with disability. She submits that she is having 40% locomotive disability, and had submitted a disability certificate along with her application on 22^nd August, 2023. Thus, she contends that her application for allotment should have been considered under the physical disability quota. In this regard, reliance is also placed on order dated 07^th October, 2021 in W.P.(C) 11018/2021 and other connected matters³ , wherein this Court, while considering a batch of petitions, took note of the fact that there are chambers which are specifically earmarked for advocates who are ‘physically handicapped’. Counsel for Petitioner states that under the reserved category for ‘physically handicapped’, there are still certain vacant chambers.

¶21

4. Let a copy of the petition be served to Respondents.

¶22

5. Re-notify on 30^th August, 2024.”

¶23

The challenge in the present matter is to the order dated 4^th July, 2024 deciding the Petitioner’s request for allotment of chambers, as a legal representative of Late Sh. Mr. Dharam Diwakar. Now, at this stage, the Petitioner has given up her right to claim the chamber as a legal representative of Late Sh. Mr. Dharam Diwakar and is only pressing the relief as a person with disability. This claim has been presented by way of a representation dated 22^nd August, 2023 and 27^th April, 2024 and 19^th July, 2024.

¶24

On the last date, as the Court had called upon the Respondents to

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/09/2024 at 11:55:08

¶27

confirm if there are any vacant chamber under the reserved category. Today, Mr. Udit Malik, ASC for Respondents, on instructions, states that there are 648 chambers of which 5% are reserved for persons with disability which translates to 32.5 chambers (Approx). As against this, 25.5 (Approx) chambers have already been allotted. It is further stated that the Petitioner’s representation and request for allotment under the reserved category of persons with disability, shall be considered in the next meeting.

¶28

In light of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that the Petitioner’s representation noted above, be considered by the Respondents, in accordance with law and a decision shall be conveyed to the Petitioner thereafter.

¶29

With the above directions, the present petition, along with pending applications, is disposed of.

¶30

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶31

SEPTEMBER 12, 2024 as

¶32

3 W.P.(C) 11018/2021 and other connected matters

¶33

This is a digitally signed order.

¶34

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/09/2024 at 11:55:08

Dinmani Sharma v. Principal District and Sessions Judge & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinmani Sharma v. Principal District and Sessions Judge & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Rajpal Vs Adm (Notification) & Anr.

Dilip Jha Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Rina Ghoshal Vs the State Trading Corporation of India Limited

Sh Ravinder Singh & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Sanjeev Kaushik Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/S Ausil Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S M.D. Overseas Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ramesh Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ram Kishan Vs the State, Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr.

Dr S M Bali Vs Union of India and Ors.

Okinawa Autotech Internationall Private Limited & Anr. Vs Union of India

Dr. Tarun Kothari Vs District Magistrate / District Appropriate Authority (West),Pc & Pndt Act, Gnct of Delhi

Khwaja Naqebullaha Vs District Magistrate of South -East Delhi & Ors.

Tamseel Fatma & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.