Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Gulzar Md. & Ors. Vs.braille Library & Ors.

Gulzar Md. & Ors. vs Braille Library & Ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided May 31, 2018
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1215475

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Decided On
Subject
Election

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Election

Key legal issue
Election

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Gulzar Md. & Ors.

Respondent

Braille Library & Ors.

Excerpt

* in the high court of delhi at new delhi + w.p.(c) 6283/2018 & cm no.24227/2018 date of order: may 31, 2018 1. gulzar md. & ors. .....petitioners through: mr. p k sinha and ms. ritu gaur, advocates braille library & ors. versus .....respondents through: mr. mohinder j s rupal and mr. prang newmai, advocates coram: hon'ble mr. justice sunil gaur order (oral)... petitioners are differently abled who were aggrieved by treatment meted out to them in the braille library and in this regard, they had submitted a representation (annexure p-6) on 7th december, 2017 which was followed by a reminder (annexure p-8) on 29th january, 2018.2. according to petitioners’ counsel, there is no proper response to the said representation. though, a challenge is laid to transfer order of 10th november, 2017, vide which second petitioner has been transferred from braille library to the university librarian office, but this court is informed by petitioners’ counsel that in pursuance of transfer order of 10th november, 2017, second petitioner has joined in university librarian office. however, petitioners’ counsel submits that the impugned transfer order is by an incompetent authority. if it is so, then second petitioner is at liberty to make a representation to seek revocation of the transfer order and if any such representation is received, then the competent authority of... respondents shall deal with it within a period of four weeks. w.p.(c) 6283/2018 page 1 of 2 the concerned respondent/competent authority shall give an effective response to representation (annexure p-6) and its fate be made known to second petitioner within six weeks thereafter.3. with the aforesaid directions, this petition and the application stand disposed of. copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties. may31 2018 p (sunil gaur) judge w.p.(c) 6283/2018 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6283/2018 & CM No.24227/2018 Date of Order: May 31, 2018 1. GULZAR MD. & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. P K Sinha and Ms. Ritu Gaur, Advocates BRAILLE LIBRARY & ORS. versus .....Respondents Through: Mr. Mohinder J S Rupal and Mr. Prang Newmai, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER

(ORAL)... Petitioner

s are differently abled who were aggrieved by treatment meted out to them in the Braille Library and in this regard, they had submitted a Representation (Annexure P-6) on 7th December, 2017 which was followed by a reminder (Annexure P-8) on 29th January, 2018.

2. According to petitioners’ counsel, there is no proper response to the said Representation. Though, a challenge is laid to transfer order of 10th November, 2017, vide which second petitioner has been transferred from Braille Library to the University Librarian Office, but this Court is informed by petitioners’ counsel that in pursuance of transfer order of 10th November, 2017, second petitioner has joined in University Librarian Office. However, petitioners’ counsel submits that the impugned transfer order is by an incompetent authority. If it is so, then second petitioner is at liberty to make a Representation to seek revocation of the transfer order and if any such Representation is received, then the competent authority of... RESPONDENTS

shall deal with it within a period of four weeks. W.P.(C) 6283/2018 Page 1 of 2 The concerned respondent/competent authority shall give an effective response to Representation (Annexure P-6) and its fate be made known to second petitioner within six weeks thereafter.

3. With the aforesaid directions, this petition and the application stand disposed of. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties. MAY31 2018 p (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE W.P.(C) 6283/2018 Page 2 of 2

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial