SUNANDA BHANDARE FOUNDATION` Vs. U.O.I. & ANOTHER
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Sunanda Bhandare Foundation'
U.O.I. And Another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) IA 10 in W.P.(C) No. 116 of 1998 Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the Convenience Chart, which indicates steps taken by all the States and Union Territories and how certain steps are yet to be taken. Steps which are yet to be taken find mention in the remarks column. Mr. Rajiv Nanda, learned counsel for the State of Uttarakhand submitted after the said Convenience Chart was filed the States of Uttarakhand, Nagaland and West Bengal have filed a reply stating, inter alia, that it has complied with the deficiencies. It is also to be noted that State of Madhya Pradesh has also filed the reply. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall peruse the said replies and submits further remarks, if required. As far as the other States are concerned, no reply has been filed. Therefore, this Court is not in a position to know whether the deficiencies that have been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner have been complied with or not. All the States and Union Territories barring the some which have not filed the response shall file the compliance affidavit by the first week of July, 2016. At this juncture Mr. Pankaj Sinha, learned counsel submitted that he has filed an IA seeking direction to the University Grants Commission to instruct all the universities in the country to provide 3% reservation as provided under Section 33 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995.
(2.) Mr. Manoj Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the University Grants Commission submits that UGC has written letters to the universities to comply with the provisions of the Act and make the reservations. The University Grants Commission shall file an affidavit by the next date of hearing.
(3.) Let the matter be listed on 27th July, 2016.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.