Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 13th March, 2020
SOWMYA T GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Siddharth Seem and Ms. Hetvi Patel, Advs.
& ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel with Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Adv. for Delhi Transport
Corporation/respondent no. 1 Mr. Tarun Johri and Mr. Ankur Gupta, Advs. for Delhi Metro Rail
Corporation/respondent no. 2
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR O R D E R 13.03.2020
D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)
JUDGMENT
1. This Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been preferred with the following prayers: “a. For a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the Respondent No. 1 to reserve seats for transgender persons in the DTC, cluster, feeder and mini buses plied by Respondent No. 1; 2020:DHC:1716-DB b. For a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to Respondent No. 1 to provide free-of-cost travel to transgender passengers in the DTC, cluster, feeder and mini buses plied by Respondent No. 1; c. For a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the Respondent No. 2 to reserve seats for transgender persons in the Delhi Metro trains plied by Respondent No. 2; d. For any such other and suitable order/orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”
2. Having heard counsel of both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the petitioner has placed reliance upon the decisions reported in National Legal Services Authority vs. Union of India and Others 2014 (5) SCC 438 and in Rajive Raturi vs. Union of India and Others 2018 (2) SCC 413, for reservation of seats and providing free of cost travel to transgenders in Delhi Transport Corporation buses, cluster buses, feeder buses and mini buses, plied by respondent no. 1 as well as for reservation of seats for transgender in Delhi Metro Rail Corporation/respondent no. 2.
3. We, therefore, direct the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide the same in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Government policies as applicable to the facts of the case and also keeping in the mind the aforesaid decisions, upon which reliance has been placed by the counsel for the petitioner. Representations have already been preferred by the petitioner, which are annexed as Annexures P-1 and P-2 to the memo of this writ petition. The decision will be taken by the respondent nos. 1 and 2 as expeditiously as possible and practicable.
4. In view of these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR, J. MARCH 13, 2020 r.bararia