Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Monday, January 20, 2025

Delhi HC Orders Immediate Construction And Repair Work Of Washrooms In District Courts

Posted in: Judiciary
Sun, Jan 12, 25, 11:24, 1 Week ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 17729
Smita Kumari Rajgarhia vs Govt of NCT of Delhi directed the immediate construction and repair work of washrooms in the district courts.

It is not just any other ordinary judgment but a judgment which directly affects not just litigants but also the lawyers especially women who are officers of the court and who are worst affected and have to undergo immeasurable hardships due to lack of availability of washrooms and even if available lack hygienic conditions and so also on many other things in most of the district courts or in very poor conditions and this is all the more applicable to States like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar among others! The condition of washrooms in Delhi which is our national capital is definitely not very much better either which necessitated the filing of this leading case. This alone explains why none other than the Delhi High Court itself in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Smita Kumari Rajgarhia vs Govt of NCT of Delhi in W.P.(C) 14517/2024 that was pronounced as recently as on 05.12.2024 has not just taken very serious note of it but also has gone ahead and directed the immediate construction and repair work of washrooms in the district courts.

It would be extremely relevant to disclose here that the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjeev Narula was dealing with a plea that had been filed by a woman lawyer while highlighting in detail the unhygienic and lamentable conditions of female washrooms in the Lawyers Chambers Block at Saket Courts. We need to note that it was in October 2024 that the Delhi High Court had appointed a lady lawyer as the Court Commissioner to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the conditions of female washrooms across all District Courts in the national capital. By all accounts, the Bench was definitely most candid to acknowledge graciously that the negligence displayed in maintaining facilities in the washrooms cannot be overlooked.

It must be also disclosed here that the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjeev Narula minced just no words to make it indubitably clear that the direction shall apply to male, female and handicapped washrooms in the District Courts to ensure a uniform standard of hygiene and functionality. What also needs to be borne in mind is that the Delhi High Court clearly directed the Delhi Government’s PWD department to forthwith commence construction and repair work for the washrooms where tenders have already been awarded. There can be just no gainsaying that this most compelling task definitely needs to be commenced and completed on a war footing!

Without beating about the bush, the Delhi High Court was most forthcoming and most forthright in directing clearly, cogently and convincingly that:
For locations where tenders are pending, the process shall be expedited and brought to completion at the earliest. This work shall commence immediately upon the relaxation of the GRAP-IV regulating restrictions. It also further directed the Chief Engineers of PWD for each court complex to coordinate closely with the respective Principal District and Sessions Judges to ensure that an uninterrupted supply of water is provided to all washrooms. In addition, the Delhi High Court also further specified stating that:
Particular attention shall be given to addressing the water supply issues identified at Saket Courts.

No doubt, the Bench had a valid point when it pointed out that the lack of hygiene products, poor maintenance and infrastructural inadequacies demand immediate action. The Bench also directed the Principal District and Sessions Judges of all District Courts to review the report that had been submitted by the Court Commissioner, identify remedial measures and ensure swift implementation. The Bench also mandated holding that:
The Bar Associations of all District Courts shall also examine the report submitted by the Court Commissioner and ensure the upkeep and maintenance of washrooms within the Lawyers’ Chambers Blocks and submit a compliance report. It was also laid down by the Bench that the matter be listed on February 10, 2025 to be heard.

At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjeev Narula of Delhi High Court sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth things in perspective in para 1 envisaging that:
The present petition brings to light the unhygienic conditions of female washrooms in the Lawyers’ Chambers Block at Saket Court. Recognizing the importance of this issue—which directly impacts the dignity, safety, and well-being of women who frequent the district courts, this Court, by order dated 16th October, 2024, appointed Ms. Harshita Nathrani as Court Commissioner to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the conditions of female washrooms across all District Courts in Delhi.

As it turned out, the Bench enunciates in para 2 that:
In compliance, Ms. Nathrani has submitted a detailed report dated 4th December, 2024, which paints a distressing picture. The report lays bare deficiencies demanding urgent attention. The findings reveal that most female washrooms in the Lawyers’ Chamber Blocks lack adequate infrastructure, including proper lighting, ventilation, and functional sanitary facilities. Issues such as seepage, exposed wiring, and the absence of essential amenities like soap and sanitary napkin vending machines have also been noticed in the report. Furthermore, Ms. Nathrani notes that regular maintenance and cleaning is absent due to an insufficient number of sanitation staff, posing serious hygiene and safety risks to users.

Do note, the Bench notes in para 3 that:
At Karkardooma Courts, in addition to the afore-mentioned issues, a significant shortage of cleaning and sanitation staff was observed. Despite a daily footfall of approximately 50,000 individuals, the number of sanitation workers is grossly inadequate to maintain acceptable hygiene standards. In response to these concerns, the Public Works Department1 awarded a tender through an award letter dated 27th August, 2023 for the renovation of 64 toilets within the Lawyers’ Chambers Blocks D, E, F, and G, aiming to improve the infrastructure and facilities of these washrooms.

Do further note, the Bench then notes in para 4 that:
Similarly, at Saket Courts, persistent water supply issues were identified. It was noted that water supply to the Lawyers’ Chambers Block is discontinued after 3-4 PM, limiting the usability of the washrooms. Addressing this issue, PWD has taken some corrective measures. Further, a tender has also been issued by PWD for the renovation of all common toilets in the Lawyers’ Chambers Block.

Be it noted, the Bench notes in para 5 that:
Significantly, the report distinguishes between the condition of washrooms within the Court Complexes and those in the Lawyers’ Chambers Blocks, noting that the latter are in a worse state. Mr. Sameer Vashisht, ASC (Civil) for GNCTD clarifies that the maintenance and upkeep of washrooms in the Lawyers’ Chambers Blocks falls under the purview of the respective Bar Associations.

To recapitulate, the Bench then recalls in para 6 pointing out that:
This Court had previously directed the Principal District and Sessions Judges of all District Courts to address these issues. Compliance reports have been filed by Dwarka Court, Rohini Court and Saket Court informing that inspections have been carried out in all washrooms. The status reports by the remaining Courts have not yet been filed. Registry is directed to send a reminder calling for the reports.

Most significantly, most remarkably and so also most forthrightly, the Bench encapsulates in para 7 what constitutes the cornerstone of this notable judgment postulating and directing that:
The negligence displayed in maintaining these facilities cannot be overlooked. The lack of hygiene products, poor maintenance, and infrastructural inadequacies demand immediate action. In view of the foregoing, the Court finds it necessary to issue the following directions:


 

  1. The Bar Associations of all District Courts and the Public Works Department are impleaded as parties to the petition. Let an amended memo of parties be filed within one week from today.
  2. The PWD, GNCTD shall forthwith commence construction and repair work for washrooms where tenders have already been awarded. For locations where tenders are pending, the process shall be expedited and brought to completion at the earliest. This work shall commence immediately upon the relaxation of the GRAP-IV regulating restrictions.
  3. The Chief Engineers of the PWD for each court complex shall coordinate closely with the respective Principal District and Sessions Judges to ensure that an uninterrupted supply of water is provided to all washrooms. Particular attention shall be given to addressing the water supply issues identified at Saket Courts.
  4. The Principal District and Sessions Judges of all District Courts shall review the report submitted by the Court Commissioner, identify remedial measures and ensure implementation. A comprehensive status report on the progress made shall be submitted before the next date of hearing.
  5. While the petition specifically pertains to female washrooms, these directions shall apply equally to male, female and handicapped washrooms in District Courts, to ensure a uniform standard of hygiene and functionality.
  6. The Bar Associations of all District Courts shall also examine the report submitted by the Court Commissioner and ensure the upkeep and maintenance of washrooms within the Lawyers’ Chambers Blocks and submit a compliance report.


What’s more, it is also worth noting that the Bench then directs in para 8 holding that:
A copy of this order shall be communicated to the Principal District and Sessions Judges, the Bar Associations, and the Chief Engineers of the PWD for immediate compliance.

Finally, the Bench then concludes by directing and holding in para 9 that:
List on 10th February, 2025.

In conclusion, I most strongly feel that this most commendable, courageous and creditworthy judgment by the Delhi High Court deserves to be implemented not just in Delhi where it is applicable but also needs to be emulated all over India especially in the District Courts where the deplorable condition of toilets and washrooms that is quite palpable merits course correction immediately. It merits just no reiteration that Delhi High Court very rightly calls for uniform standard of hygiene. Of course, this most pressing issue definitely cannot be kept in the back burner or in the cold storage any longer. No denying it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Rahendra Baglari v. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M) writ petitioner for adjoining a Judicial Magistrate and the High Court and its Registry as Respondents to his plea against the order passed by the said Magistrate.
Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal vs.Uttarakhand long standing or established status quo brought about by judgments interpreting local or state laws, should not be lightly departed from.
Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur apart from High Court at Mumbai but on the contrary UP which has maximum pending cases in India
It is most shocking to see that a peaceful, one of the most developed and most prosperous state like Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur
I am neither a member nor supporter of BJP or any other political party nor a member of any of BJP's affiliated organizations like the RSS or VHP or any other organization.
Kirti vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited advocates cannot throw away legal rights or enter into arrangements contrary to law. It was also made clear that any concession in law made in this regard by either counsel would not bind the parties.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on December 28, 2020 had expressed shock and deep concern on the arbitrary, illegal and brazen exercise of brute power by the police against lawyers, including the search conducted at the premises of an advocate representing some of the accused in the North-East Delhi riots cases.
media trial during criminal investigation interferes with administration of justice and hence amounts to contempt of court as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Jamal v. Maharashtra dismissed a plea filed by the National President of BJP Minority Morcha – Jamal Anwar Siddiqui seeking 'X' category security.
Duroply Industries Limited and anr. Vs Ma Mansa Enterprises Private Limited in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction has recalled its own order of an injunction passed in a trademark dispute as the Judge presiding over the case had appeared for one party in respect of the same trademark in the past.
At the outset, it must be stated rather disconcertingly that it is India's misfortune that UP which has the maximum population more than 23 crore as Yogi Adityanath
At the outset, it has to be stated without mincing any words that it merits no reiteration that Judges age for retirement must be now increased to 75
Rajeev Bhardwaj v. H.P while dismissing a plea seeking a declaration of a sitting Judge's dissenting view as Coram non-judice and non est in the eyes of law.
Adv KG Suresh vs UOI has declared as unconstitutional the bar on lawyers representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals constituted under the Maintenance Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Maintenance Act).
Bar Council of India ensured that there is an entrance exam now for all those lawyers who want to practice which has to be cleared before lawyers can start practicing.
It is a matter of grave concern that while our Constitution enshrines the right to equality as postulated in Article 14 but in practice what we witness is just the reverse.
seeking interim bail/parole for the under-privileged and under-trial prisoners/convicts keeping in view the terrible havoc unleashed by the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.
When an intellectual giant like Fali Sam Nariman whom I personally rate as the world's top jurist and it is not just me but his extremely impeccable credentials are acknowledged in legal field, it is not just India but the whole world which listens to him in silence
Treasa Josfine vs Kerala that a woman who is fully qualified cannot be denied of her right to be considered for employment on the ground that she is a woman and because the nature of the employment would require her to work during night hours.
Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs constituted a Committee to suggest reforms in our criminal justice system which has been facing repeated criticism for its various drawbacks
Congress government's rule in Centre, Kapil Sibal who was Union Law Minister had written very categorically to UP Government for creating a high court bench for West UP at Meerut
completely about the truthfulness of the retracted confession and should corroborate his/her confession as it is unsafe to convict an accused person solely on the basis of the retracted confession
Thabir Sagar vs Odisha the practice of Advocate's clerks filing affidavits on behalf of parties is unacceptable. Such a practice is in gross violation of Rule 26 of the Orissa High Court Rules. It has therefore rightly directed its Registry to ensure that steps are taken forthwith to stop the practice of accepting such affidavits
COVID situation in UP, the Allahabad High Court has issued revised fresh guidelines for the functioning of all the Courts and Tribunals subordinate to it.
amended its rules to make criticism and attack of Bar Council decisions by members a misconduct and ground for disqualification or suspension or removal of membership of a member from the Bar Council.
CJI NV Ramana who was appointed as the 48th CJI on 6th April, 2021 and took oath as CJI on 24th April 2021 has very rightly expressed his concern on the social media noise and how it adversely impacts the institutions also like judiciary to a great extent which actually should not be the case.
At the crucial meeting of the Central Action Committee. of more than 20 districts of Bar Association of West UP held at Aligarh
Why UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population more than 24 crore which is more than even Pakistan
When finances are needed for the purpose of improving the judicial system at the lower levels, there is reluctance to make such finances available.
rarely ever booked and made to face the consequences which only serves to further encourage men in uniform to take it for granted to indulge in worst custodial torture
Tarun Saxena vs Union of India as ultra vires Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 which bars lawyers from representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals
Dhanbad district of Jharkhand was mowed down by an autorickshaw has sent shivers down the spine. The ghastly incident happened on morning of July 28 near the Magistrate colony of Dhanbad that was close to the Judge's residence.
Suman Chadha & Anr. vs. Central Bank of India in that the wilful breach of the undertaking given to the Court can amount to Contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Rajasthan High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts 2020 which shall be applicable to the proceeding of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and all the Subordinate Courts of the Rajasthan with immediate effect.
Arun Singh Chauhan v/s MP deprecate the conduct of a practicing advocate who chose not to answer the repeated queries of the Court pertaining to the maintainability of his petition seeking issuance of a writ of quo warranto and regarding the non-impleadment of a necessary party
Dr.Mukut Nath Verma vs UoI Allahabad High Court imposed Rs 5 lakh costs on an advocate Dr Mukut Nath Verma after concluding that he unauthorisedly filed a writ petition on behalf of suspended and absconding IPS officer Mani Lal Patidar and also levelled serious allegations against state authorities and thereby misleading the Court.
Anil JS vs Kerala that instances of allegations about the police disrespecting the citizens were arriving at its doors with alarming regularity and therefore issued certain general directions in its judgment.
If there is one Judge on whom I have blind faith for his exemplary conduct throughout his brilliant career and who can never favour wrongly even his own son
Indianisation of our legal system is the need of the hour and it is crucial to make the justice delivery system more accessible and effective.
the gang war of different gangs have now reached right up to the court premises itself which are supposed to be the holiest shrines for getting justice.
It is not just for enjoying life or going for some holiday trip that lawyers of West UP repeatedly keep going on strike since last many decades.
CM Yogi Adityanath UP has progressed by leaps and bounds which one certainly cannot deny but why is it that it has just one High Court Bench only and that too just approximately 200 km away at the city famously called Nawab City
Just changing name of Allahabad to Prayagraj won't change the ground reality. It is a proven fact that High Court is still called Allahabad High Court and not Prayagraj High Court.
It is most shocking that all the Chief Justices of India from 1947 till 2000 were never shocked nor were any world famous jurist like Nani Ardeshir Palkhiwala, Ram Jethmalani, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan among many others
Raggu Baniya @ Raghwendra vs UP has directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to instruct the District Magistrates of all the districts to re-evaluate the cases for remission after 14 years of incarceration even if appeals in such cases are pending in the High Court.
Union Minister of State for Law and Justice – SP Singh Baghel who is also an MP from Agra again in Western UP and who just recently took over has made it clear that his ministry was open to the setting up of a Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Western UP.
Anil Kumar and Anr. Vs Amit that the practice of advocates acting as power of attorney holders of their clients and also as advocates in the matter, is contrary to the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Shashank Singh vs/ Honourable High Court of Judicature at Allahabad that under Article 233 of the Constitution of India, a Judicial Officer regardless of his or her previous experience, as an Advocate, cannot apply and compete for appointment to any vacancy in the post of District Judge.
It must be stated at the very outset that it is quite bewildering and baffling to see that the state of UP which Ban ki moon who is the former UN Secretary General had slammed as the rape and crime capital of India
most powerfully raised vocally the legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP which is the crying need of the hour also.
Top